THE  LIBRARY 
OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


THE   INTERNATIONAL   MIND 

AN   ARGUMENT   FOR 

THE   JUDICIAL   SETTLEMENT   OF 

INTERNATIONAL  DISPUTES 


BY    THE    SAME    AUTHOR 

The  Meaning  of  Education— The  Macmillan  Co., 
1898 — xii  +  230pp.  ....  $1.00 

True  and  False  Democracy — The  Macmillan  Co., 
1907 — xii  +  iupp.  ....  $1.00 

The  American  as  He  Is — The  Macmillan  Co.,  1908 — 
X  +  97PP $1.00 

Philosophy — Columbia  University  Press,  1911 — vii  + 
51  pp $1.00 

Why  Should  We  Change  Our  Form  of  Govern- 
ment?— Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1912 — xv  + 
159  PP 75  cents 


THE 
INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

AN  ARGUMENT  FOR 

THE  JUDICIAL  SETTLEMENT  OF 

INTERNATIONAL  DISPUTES 


BY 

NICHOLAS  MURRAY  BUTLER 

PRESIDENT  OF  COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 

PRESIDENT  OF   THE  AMERICAN  ASSOCIATION   FOR    INTERNATIONAL   CONCILIATION 
MEMBER  OF  THE  AMERICAN  ACADEMY  OF  ARTS  AND  LETTERS 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 
1912 


COPYRIGHT,  1912,  BY 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 


Published  September,  1912 


College 
Library 

JX 


TO  THAT  LARGE  AND  GROWING  COMPANY 
OF  MEN  AND  WOMEN  WHO,  IN  EUROPE, 
ASIA,  AFRICA,  AND  THE  TWO  AMERICAS, 
ARE  WORKING  TO  HASTEN  THE  COMING 
OF  THE  DAY  WHEN  JUSTICE  SHALL  TAKE 
THE  PLACE  OF  FORCE  IN  THE  SETTLEMENT 
OF  DIFFERENCES  BETWEEN  NATIONS 


1049999 


PREFACE 

THE  substitution  of  justice  for  force  in  set- 
tling the  differences  that  arise  between  nations 
has  become  a  question  of  practical  politics. 
This  is  due  in  part  to  the  almost  unbearable 
burden  of  the  world's  armaments  and  to  the 
obstacle  which  their  cost  offers  to  carrying  out 
policies  of  constructive  statesmanship  in  solv- 
ing the  new  social  and  political  problems  that 
have  arisen  everywhere.  It  is  due  in  part, 
also,  to  the  growing  moral  sensitiveness  of  men. 
Long  after  theft  and  murder  had  ceased  to  be 
respectable  as  between  individuals  they  were 
regarded  with  equanimity,  and  even  with  es- 
teem, as  between  nations,  for  the  reason  that 
they  were  thought  in  some  way  to  contribute 
to  a  high  and  lofty  patriotism.  Groups  of  men 
bearing  a  common  name  were  once  believed  to 
have,  and  are  still  sometimes  believed  to  have, 
a  superior  mission  in  the  world  which  justifies 
them  in  the  use  of  force  in  their  dealings  with 
other  peoples.  The  advance  of  civilization 
vii 


viii  PREFACE 

through  rapine  and  slaughter  is  even  now  a 
theme  on  which  orators  and  poets  like  to  dwell. 
Time  and  time  again,  no  doubt,  it  has  been 
necessary  or  unavoidable  that  human  beings 
should  kill  each  other,  but  the  mere  killing  is 
not  anything  in  which  to  glory. 

With  the  rise  in  the  world  of  a  real  public 
opinion,  with  the  spread  of  information  and  of 
opportunity  for  the  education  of  the  whole  peo- 
ple, with  the  growth  of  travel  and  of  commerce, 
with  migration  on  a  large  scale  from  one  part 
of  the  world  to  another,  and  with  the  wider 
spread  of  a  knowledge  of  foreign  languages,  a 
new  condition  of  national  interdependence  and 
interpenetration  has  been  brought  about.  This 
makes  war  increasingly  difficult  and  increas- 
ingly repulsive,  and  it  disposes  men  to  work 
more  vigorously  for  the  creation  of  those  in- 
stitutions, civil  and  political,  which  extend  the 
area  over  which  the  principles  of  justice  are 
made  applicable  and  enforceable. 

Independent  courts  of  justice  protecting  the 
individual  from  the  invasion  of  his  guaranteed 
constitutional  rights,  whether  by  other  individ- 
uals or  by  agencies  of  government  itself,  are 
the  epoch-marking  contribution  of  the  United 


PREFACE  ix 

States  to  political  science.  A  judiciary  made 
dependent  on  changes  of  popular  temper  or  on 
varying,  often  contradictory,  manifestations  of 
popular  will,  would  become  a  mere  administra- 
tive device  under  the  control  and  direction  of 
the  executive  power  of  the  moment. 

The  striking  service  performed  by  an  inde- 
pendent judiciary  in  the  United  States  indi- 
cates that  an  independent  judiciary  will  offer 
the  best  solution  of  the  problems,  international 
in  character,  that  arise  out  of  international 
business  and  international  rivalries.  National 
policies  will  always  be  settled,  and  properly 
so,  in  accordance  with  a  nation's  own  gov- 
ernmental forms  and  processes.  International 
claims  and  international  conflicts,  when,  as  is 
usually  the  case,  they  are  justiciable  in  char- 
acter, should,  at  this  stage  of  the  world's  his- 
tory, go  automatically  to  an  independent  in- 
ternational court  clothed  with  full  authority 
to  do  justice.  The  decrees  of  such  a  court 
would  be  enforced  by  the  moral  power  of  the 
civilized  nations  of  the  earth. 

The  establishment  of  an  independent  inter- 
national court  of  justice  to  hear  and  to  decide 
causes  between  nations  will  not  make  war  im- 


x  PREFACE 

possible.  The  brute  elements  in  man  must 
be  wholly  eliminated  and  passion  must  be  en- 
tirely subordinated  to  reason  before  that  end 
can  be  reached.  But  the  existence  of  an  inter- 
national court  of  weight,  dignity,  and  authority 
may  easily  prevent  many  wars  and  go  far  to- 
ward removing  the  causes  out  of  which  wars  so 
often  grow. 

Standing  behind  this  court,  however,  there 
must  be  on  the  part  of  the  great  nations  of  the 
earth  a  disposition  to  submit  to  its  decrees  and 
a  willingness  to  co-operate  in  enforcing  them. 
There  must  be  a  state  of  public  opinion  which 
regards  other  peoples  not  as  rivals  to  be  an- 
tagonized, but  as  friends  to  work  with  in  the 
accomplishment  of  a  common  purpose.  To 
create  such  a  public  opinion  there  must  first 
be  developed  among  statesmen,  journalists,  and 
men  of  affairs  a  true  international  mind. 

The  addresses  here  printed  are  an  endeavor 
to  contribute  to  that  end. 


NICHOLAS  MURRAY  BUTLER 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY, 
June  15,  1912 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

I    THE  PROGRESS  OF  REAL  INTERNATION- 
ALISM             i 

II     THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS  AND  PUBLIC 

OPINION 19 

III  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS?     .       45 

IV  THE   EDUCATION  OF  THE  WORLD  FOR 

PEACE 67 

V  THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND  ....   95 
INDEX .  .  .  115 


I 

THE    PROGRESS    OF    REAL    INTERNA- 
TIONALISM 


Opening  Address  as  Chairman  of  the  Lake  Mohonk  Con- 
ference on  International  Arbitration,  May  22,  1907 


THE    PROGRESS   OF    REAL    INTERNA- 
TIONALISM 

This  Conference  reassembles  at  an  auspi- 
cious moment.  Our  country  is  still  ringing 
with  the  echoes  of  the  lofty  sentiments  and 
noble  ideals  which  found  expression  before 
thousands  of  attentive  auditors  at  the  National 
Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress  held  in  New 
York  a  month  ago.  High  officers  of  govern- 
ment and  leaders  of  public  opinion  at  home 
and  abroad  there  united  in  giving  voice  to  sen- 
timents which  mean,  if  they  mean  anything, 
that  a  new  era  is  dawning  in  the  moral  history 
of  mankind.  Moreover,  before  another  month 
has  passed,  the  representatives  of  more  than 
two  score  nations  will  assemble  at  The  Hague 
to  constitute  a  second  International  Conference 
called  in  the  interest  of  international  peace. 
Whether  we  look  backward  or  forward,  there- 
fore, we  see  only  signs  of  good  omen. 

The  nations  of  the  earth  are  faced  by  prob- 
lems of  amazing  complexity  and  difficulty. 


4  THE  PROGRESS  OF 

The  spread  of  democracy,  while  it  has  greatly 
complicated  these  problems  and  enlarged  their 
scope,  has  also  hastened  the  day  of  their  satis- 
factory and  beneficent  solution. 

Unless  all  signs  fail,  we  are  entering  upon  a 
period  which  may  be  described  fittingly  as  one 
of  internationalism.  For  long  centuries  the 
peoples  of  the  earth  have  been  obeying  the 
deep  impulse  to  build  themselves  into  nations. 
Groups  of  men  marked  out  by  origin,  by  com- 
mon characteristics,  and  by  language,  for  liv- 
ing together  under  one  form  of  government 
and  within  one  political  boundary,  have  grown 
into  nations.  These  nations  have,  each  in  its 
own  way,  established  constitutional  govern- 
ment, or  seem  about  to  do  so.  With  consti- 
tutional government  has  gone  hand  in  hand 
the  conception  of  the  reign  of  law  and  the 
dominance  of  justice.  The  reign  of  law  and 
the  dominance  of  justice  mean  that  might 
shall  not  be  permitted  to  seize  the  place  of 
right,  and  that  no  individual  shall  be  allowed 
to  enact  his  own  claims  and  ambitions  into 
law  or  decree.  These  must  be  submitted  in 
formal  and  stated  fashion  to  a  tribunal  con- 
stituted for  the  purpose.  No  nation  in  which 


REAL  INTERNATIONALISM  5 

this  conception  of  law  and  justice  did  not  pre- 
vail could  be  counted  for  a  moment  among 
civilized  peoples. 

This  intra-national  development  is  a  happy 
augury  for  the  international  era  which  is  open- 
ing. It  is  not  too  much  to  believe,  that  while 
certain  differences  between  individual  relations 
and  disputes  and  international  relations  and 
disputes  must  be  admitted,  yet  the  analogy 
between  them  is  sufficiently  close  to  make  us 
full  of  hope  that  what  has  been  accomplished 
intra-nationally  may  not  be  long  delayed  in 
coming  internationally. 

Like  an  individual,  a  nation  has  a  mind  and 
a  conscience,  and  it  has  them  in  a  very  real 
sense.  As  politicians  and  statesmen  have  long 
since  found  out,  the  terms  Puritan  conscience 
in  America,  nonconformist  conscience  in  Eng- 
land, French  spirit  and  German  idealism  on 
the  Continent,  are  not  names  for  empty  ab- 
stractions, but  they  stand  in  each  case  for 
what  is  terribly  real.  One  of  the  chief  prob- 
lems of  our  time  is  to  bring  the  nations'  minds 
and  the  nations'  consciences  to  bear  on  the 
moral  problems  involved  in  international  re- 
lations. This  is  a  step  in  the  moral  education 


6  THE  PROGRESS  OF 

of  the  world.  It  carries  with  it  no  necessary 
criticism  upon  what  has  gone  before  and  no 
aspersion  upon  what  now  exists,  any  more  than 
the  full  fruit  reflects  discredit  upon  the  seed 
from  which  it  sprang.  The  more  perfect  and 
complete  morality  of  the  future  is  itself  to  be 
the  product  of  the  incomplete  and  imperfect, 
but  always  improving,  morality  of  the  past 
and  of  the  present. 

It  is  a  mistake  in  history  and  an  error  in 
ethics  to  apply  the  standards  and  ideals  of  one 
period  to  the  deeds  and  accomplishments  of 
an  earlier  one.  When  we  are  asked  to  point 
out  how  we  would  have  settled  the  War  of  the 
Roses,  the  Thirty- Years'  War,  the  war  between 
Parliament  and  the  Stuart  King,  the  French 
Revolution,  the  Napoleonic  struggles,  or  the 
American  Civil  War,  by  arbitration  or  by  judi- 
cial methods,  the  answer  is  that  the  question 
is  quite  irrelevant.  Whether  mankind  could 
have  settled  the  problems  involved  in  all  of 
those  contests,  or  in  any  one  of  them,  without 
the  use  of  force  and  the  shedding  of  blood,  I 
very  much  doubt;  but  then  man  was  an  earlier 
and  a  cruder  being  than  he  is  to-day.  More- 
over, the  nations  and  their  forms  of  govern- 


REAL  INTERNATIONALISM  ^ 

ment  were  then  only  in  the  making,  and  there 
is  no  possible  parallel  with  present  conditions. 
The  crucial  question  is  not,  will  our  standards 
and  ideals  apply  backward,  but  will  they  not 
apply  forward?  Can  we  do  better  than  to  use 
the  fine  phrase  of  our  own  Lowell,  and  resolve 
not  to 

Attempt  the  Future's    portal,    with    the    Past's   blood- 
rusted  key? 

The  student  of  history  and  of  nature,  and  still 
more  the  student  of  philosophy,  realizes  the 
implications  of  the  process  of  evolution.  Our 
political  systems,  our  ethical  standards,  and 
our  moral  aspirations,  are  a  development  and 
are  in  development  to-day.  We  need  not  pass 
unfavorable  judgment  upon  those  who  have 
gone  before  in  insisting  that  we  shall  endeavor 
to  refrain  from  adopting  methods  which  they 
often  employed.  We  simply  say  that  we  have 
discovered  and  are  prepared  to  apply  newer  and 
better  and  more  efficient  methods  than  theirs 
were.  We  do  not  say  that  they  should  have 
applied  our  methods,  for  we  dare  not  assert 
that  the  time  had  then  come  when  such  appli- 
cation was  possible;  but  we  do  say,  with  the 


8  THE  PROGRESS  OF 

strongest  emphasis,  that  we  shall  sacrifice  no 
jot  or  tittle  of  our  present  moral  insights  or  of 
our  present  intellectual  convictions  in  facing 
the  international  problems  of  to-morrow. 

Joubert,  of  whom  both  Sainte-Beuve  and 
Matthew  Arnold  have  written  so  charmingly, 
finely  said :  "  Force  and  Right  are  the  governors 
of  this  world;  Force  till  Right  is  ready."  Right 
is  ready  in  this  twentieth  century  to  claim  her 
kingdom,  and  she  asks  Force  to  step  down  from 
the  throne  it  has  so  long  occupied  that  it 
may  serve  from  this  time  on,  not  as  Right's 
substitute,  but  as  Right's  ally. 

There  are  good  and  earnest  men  who  now  and 
then  express  the  fear  that  righteousness  and 
peace  may  somehow  or  other  come  into  con- 
flict. This  judgment  appears  to  me  to  be  based 
upon  a  study  of  the  conditions  that  have  pre- 
vailed in  the  past,  rather  than  upon  an  appre- 
ciation of  the  forces  that  are  indicated  to  rule 
the  future.  Not  every  judgment  of  a  judicial 
tribunal,  however  learned  and  disinterested  its 
members,  brings  complete  satisfaction  to  both 
litigants,  or  even  to y the  public  at  large;  yet 
the  overwhelming  majority  of  judicial  decisions 
are  equitable  and  do  give  satisfaction  to  the 


REAL  INTERNATIONALISM  9 

public.  Cannot  the  same  be  said  of  the  judicial 
settlement  of  differences  between  litigants  when 
those  litigants  are  nations  instead  of  individuals? 
Or,  if  it  cannot  be  said,  then  what  assurance 
have  we,  if  force  be  resorted  to,  that  the  cause 
of  righteousness  will  prevail  in  the  struggle? 
Will  not  "God  be  on  the  side  of  the  heaviest 
battalions,"  as  Voltaire  cynically  suggested? 
If  so,  then  the  cause  of  righteousness  will  not 
be  advanced  by  going  to  war,  unless  it  can  be 
supposed  to  be  advanced  by  the  mere  struggle 
on  its  behalf.  But  if  this  be  true,  why  should 
the  struggle  on  behalf  of  righteousness  take  the 
brute  form  of  physical  exertion,  rather  than  the 
truly  human  form  of  moral  endeavor?  The 
truth  is  that  fighting  is  an  animal  appetite,  and, 
excuse  it  as  we  may,  moral  beings  must  treat  it 
as  they  treat  other  animal  appetites  and  sub- 
ject it  to  rational  control. 

It  is  difficult,  therefore,  to  see  what  real 
ground  there  is  for  supposing  that  righteousness 
and  peace  can  come  into  conflict  when  those 
who  seek  righteousness  are  moral  persons.  If 
they  are  not  moral  persons,  collective  or  indi- 
vidual, then  what  concept  can  they  possibly 
have  of  righteousness?  So  long  as  human  na- 


io  THE  PROGRESS  OF 

ture  remains  human,  the  several  nations  will 
each  require  their  systems  of  police,  and  the 
world  at  large  will  require  an  international  po- 
lice; but  this  international  police,  while  con- 
stituted of  armies  and  navies,  will,  when  it 
comes,  be  constituted  in  a  way  and  from  a  point 
of  view  quite  different  from  armies  and  navies 
maintained  for  offensive  war. 

The  splendid  accomplishment  of  this  Confer- 
ence during  all  the  years  of  its  existence  has 
been  the  arousing  and  directing  of  public  opin- 
ion. The  National  Arbitration  and  Peace  Con- 
gress in  New  York  gave  strong  impetus  to  this 
work.  I  feel  it  not  too  much  to  say  that  that 
Congress,  in  a  single  week,  carried  us  forward 
quite  half  a  century  toward  the  time  when 
higher  conceptions  of  international  justice  shall 
prevail.  A  public  opinion  which,  in  the  person 
of  10,000  or  more  of  its  most  responsible  rep- 
resentatives, could  participate  with  joy  and  sat- 
isfaction in  the  discussions  in  New  York,  will 
not  fail  to  make  itself  heard  in  the  council  cham- 
bers of  governments,  nor  will  the  aroused  public 
opinion  of  the  United  States  be  without  large 
influence  in  Europe.  While  we  Americans  have 
not  always  been  careful  to  conserve  the  sources 


REAL  INTERNATIONALISM  n 

of  our  best  influence  upon  our  European  con- 
temporaries, nevertheless  it  remains  true  that 
American  public  opinion,  because  of  its  detach- 
ment from  older  animosities,  struggles,  and  am- 
bitions, and  because  of  its  essentially  democratic 
basis,  is  hearkened  to  by  monarchs,  by  parlia- 
ments, and  by  unofficial  citizens  who  speak 
other  tongues  than  ours. 

American  public  opinion  will  gain  in  influence 
abroad  if  its  positive  recommendations  in  regard 
to  the  attainment  of  international  justice  are 
both  sagacious  and  reasonable.  We  must  avoid 
encumbering  our  program  with  non-essentials 
and  we  must  not  fail  to  observe  a  due  sense  of 
proportion  in  what  we  recommend. 

Speaking  for  myself,  I  should  wholly  avoid 
at  the  present  time  the  question  of  disarma- 
ment. Nations  and  governments  have  a  vary- 
ing sense  of  responsibility  for  order  within  and 
for  safety  without  their  boundaries.  Disarma- 
ment will  never  come  by  pressure  from  with- 
out a  nation,  but  only  by  pressure  from  within. 
If  justice  is  established  between  nations,  peace 
will  follow  as  a  matter  of  course.  The  reign  of 
peace  will  cause  armaments  to  atrophy  from 
disuse.  Disarmament  will  follow  peace  as  an 
effect,  not  precede  it  as  a  cause. 


12  THE  PROGRESS  OF 

Yet,  while  passing  disarmament  by,  we  may 
profitably  urge  the  wisdom  of  formal  inter- 
national consideration  of  the  possibility  of  re- 
stricting the  farther  growth  of  the  great  armies 
and  navies  of  the  world,  without  impairing  the 
efficiency  of  those  that  exist.  The  present 
British  Government  has  taken  a  most  praise- 
worthy stand  in  this  regard. 

From  the  forthcoming  Hague  Conference  we 
should  ask,  I  think,  chiefly  two  things,  and  if 
both  of  them  should  be  given  us,  a  long  step 
forward  would  be  taken. 

i.  We  should  ask  that  the  Permanent  Hague 
Court  be  transformed  from  a  semi-diplomatic 
into  a  truly  judicial  tribunal.  We  should  ask 
that  judges  be  substituted  for  arbitrators.  We 
wish  to  see  a  permanent  international  court 
which,  like  our  United  States  Supreme  Court, 
will  have  a  status,  a  procedure,  traditions,  and 
precedents  of  its  own.  We  wish  to  see  interna- 
tional law  declared  and  established  as  well  as 
individual  differences  composed. 

The  present  Hague  Court  is  in  reality  only  an 
eligible  list  from  which  two  litigants  may  choose 
those  to  whom  they  will  submit  their  cause.  In 
its  stead  I  should  like  to  see  a  permanent  body 
of  judges  chosen  for  long  terms  or  for  life,  paid 


REAL  INTERNATIONALISM  13 

suitable  salaries,  and  as  independent  of  the  na- 
tions from  which  they  are  chosen  as  members 
of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  are  of  the 
President  who  appoints  or  the  Senate  which 
confirms  them. 

Some  concern  is  expressed  as  to  how  the  find- 
ings of  this  court  would  be  enforced.  Are  we 
not  justified  in  believing  that  the  moral  sense  of 
the  civilized  world  would  enforce  them  in  ninety- 
nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred  ?  For  the  extreme 
hundredth  case  of  disobedience  an  international 
police  would  be  needed.  That,  however,  many 
of  us  regard  as  a  remote  possibility. 

2.  We  should  ask  that  the  Hague  Conference, 
now  assembling  for  the  second  time  at  the  call 
of  a  monarch,  be  made  to  assemble  automat- 
ically hereafter  at  regular  intervals,  say  once  in 
four  or  five  years.  So  important  an  assembling 
of  the  nations  should  be  independent  of  the  will 
of  any  one  ruler,  executive,  or  parliament.  The 
Third  Pan-American  Conference  made  provision 
for  the  periodic  assembling  hereafter  of  repre- 
sentatives appointed  by  all  the  American  gov- 
ernments. The  second  Hague  Conference  should 
take  similar  action  in  its  sphere. 

These,  then,  I  hold  to  be  the  most  important 


i4  THE  PROGRESS  OF 

and  most  practical  steps  to  be  urged  upon  the 
second  Hague  Conference:  (i)  to  substitute  a 
truly  judicial  for  a  semi-diplomatic  interna- 
tional tribunal;  and  (2)  to  provide  for  the  re- 
assembling of  the  Conference  itself  at  stated 
intervals. 

If  it  be  argued  that  such  a  permanent  judicial 
tribunal,  if  established,  would  find  no  business 
to  transact,  let  it  be  remembered,  at  least  by 
Americans,  that  the  members  of  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court  were  first  appointed  on 
September  26,  1789;  that  the  Court  first  or- 
ganized on  February  i,  1790,  and  that  for  a  full 
year  it  adjourned  because  there  was  no  business 
on  its  calendar.  In  a  few  years,  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court  had  become  one  of  the 
busiest  official  bodies  in  the  world.  Moreover, 
if  such  a  court  were  given  power  to  pass  judi- 
cially upon  international  claims,  its  docket 
would  soon  be  full. 

In  the  stated  reassembling  of  the  Hague 
Conference  lies  the  germ  of  the  international 
parliament  which  will  one  day  come  into  being. 

There  is  another  aspect  of  international  re- 
lations in  time  of  war  which  has  not  attracted 
the  attention  it  deserves.  The  suggestion  that 


REAL  INTERNATIONALISM  15 

neutrality  should  extend  to  financial  assistance 
has  been  brought  forward  by  men  who  are  in 
no  sense  unpractical.  It  appears  to  have  been 
an  early  conception  of  so  practical  a  nation- 
builder  as  Cecil  Rhodes.  Quite  independently, 
Mr.  James  Speyer,  whose  experience  as  an  in- 
ternational financier  is  very  large,  made  the 
same  suggestion  two  years  ago.  His  exact 
language  was  as  follows: 

"It  does  not  seem  a  wild  flight  of  imagi- 
nation to  suggest  that  the  signatory  powers 
might  agree  to  maintain  in  future,  what  for 
want  of  a  better  term  might  be  called  financial 
neutrality.  In  case  two  powers  went  to  war 
without  first  submitting  their  grievances  and 
differences  to  arbitration,  as  provided  by  the 
Hague  Protocol,  why  should  not  the  other 
powers  bind  themselves  not  to  assist  either  of 
the  belligerents  financially,  but  to  see  to  it  that 
strict  neutrality  was  preserved  by  their  citi- 
zens? Rich  nations  with  an  extended  com- 
merce are  vitally  concerned  in  maintaining 
peace,  and  if  no  financial  assistance  could  be 
obtained  from  the  outside,  few  nations  would, 
in  the  face  of  the  most  effective  neutrality  of 
the  other  powers,  incur  the  peril  of  bankruptcy, 


16  THE  PROGRESS  OF 

and  the  inevitable  wars  of  the  future  would  at 
least  be  shortened." 

In  one  form  or  another  this  proposal  has  re- 
ceived the  support  of  Mr.  Bryan,  who  spoke 
of  it  at  the  Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress 
in  New  York,  and  of  Secretary  Straus,  who 
referred  to  it  in  his  recent  address  before  the 
meeting  of  the  International  Law  Society  at 
Washington.  With  the  support  of  names  such 
as  these  this  proposal  takes  on  distinct  im- 
portance and  offers  itself  as  worthy  of  se- 
rious consideration  with  a  view  to  determining 
how  it  could  be  carried  into  practical  opera- 
tion. 

One  other  matter  concerns  Americans  alone. 
Each  time  an  important  international  con- 
ference is  to  be  held,  the  appointing  power 
searches  the  country  over  for  the  most  com- 
petent and  effective  representatives  of  Ameri- 
can interests  and  of  American  opinion.  Why 
should  we  not  constitute  a  body  of  permanent 
representatives  at  such  international  confer- 
ences out  of  the  distinguished  men  who,  as 
President  of  the  United  States  or  as  Secretary 
of  State,  have  directed  for  a  time  the  foreign 
policy  of  the  nation?  Those  who  have  been 


REAL  INTERNATIONALISM  17 

incumbents  of  these  high  offices  are  men  who 
have  enjoyed  public  confidence  and  esteem  in 
the  highest  degree,  and  their  service  has  placed 
them  beyond  the  reach  of  party  animosity  or 
party  feeling.  These  experienced  statesmen, 
officially  constituted  as  international  conferees 
on  behalf  of  the  United  States,  and  in  receipt 
of  an  appropriate  salary  fixed  by  law,  would 
bring  to  their  task  both  unusual  equipment  and 
unusual  experience.  Such  use  of  those  who 
had  rendered  distinguished  service  to  the  na- 
tion as  Chief  Executive  or  as  Secretary  of 
State  would  be  in  every  respect  fitting. 

Every  portent  is  favorable  for  the  policies 
in  which  we  believe  and  which  we  urge.  The 
civilized  world  is  at  peace  and  there  is  no  ruler 
and  no  party  bent  on  disturbing  that  peace. 
The  more  powerful  nations  are  presided  over 
by  governments  or  monarchs  whose  faces  are 
turned  toward  the  light.  Our  own  President 
and  his  Cabinet,  the  Government  of  the  day 
in  Great  Britain,  the  President  of  the  French 
Republic  and  his  official  advisers,  the  German 
Emperor,  and  the  Emperor  of  Austria-Hungary, 
are  alike  devoted  to  the  economic  and  moral 
uplifting  of  their  people  and  to  the  avoid- 


i8  REAL  INTERNATIONALISM 

ance  of  war  and  strife.  The  German  Emperor, 
against  whom  criticisms  are  sometimes  leveled, 
is,  I  dare  assert  with  confidence,  a  convinced 
believer  in  the  policies  of  peace  and  their  un- 
told advantage  to  the  great  people  at  whose 
head  he  stands.  Indeed,  no  responsible  ruler 
is  likely,  so  far  as  the  signs  of  the  moment  go, 
to  be  responsible  for  breaking  the  world's  peace. 
If  that  peace  is  to  be  broken,  it  will  be  bro- 
ken, I  think,  by  the  irresponsible,  the  reckless, 
and  the  untamed.  At  this  stage  of  the  world's 
history,  we  must  all  unite  to  hold  these  ele- 
ments of  the  population  in  check.  The  world 
has  come  of  age,  and,  as  Archbishop  Temple 
wrote  nearly  half  a  century  ago,  "We  are  now 
men,  governed  by  principles,  if  governed  at  all, 
and  cannot  rely  any  longer  on  the  impulses  of 
youth  or  the  discipline  of  childhood.'* 


II 


THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS  AND 
PUBLIC  OPINION 


Opening  Address  as  Chairman  of  the  Lake  Mohonk  Con- 
ference on  International  Arbitration,  May  19,  1909 


THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS  AND 
PUBLIC  OPINION 

Two  years  ago  when  I  last  had  the  honor 
of  addressing  this  Conference  as  its  presiding 
officer,  we  were  all  looking  forward  with  con- 
fidence and  high  anticipation  to  the  second 
Hague  Conference,  then  soon  to  assemble.  We 
were  much  concerned  with  the  program  of 
business  to  be  laid  before  that  Conference, 
and  with  the  forms  of  agreement  or  declara- 
tion which  we  hoped  would  there  be  decided 
upon.  In  particular,  emphasis  was  laid  upon 
the  desire,  widely  entertained  by  right  think- 
ing men,  that  the  second  Hague  Conference 
should  take  the  steps  necessary  to  build  up 
a  truly  judicial  international  tribunal,  by  the 
side  of  or  in  succession  to  the  semi-diplomatic 
tribunal  which  had  been  the  fruit  of  the  first 
conference  at  the  Hague;  and  that  the  Con- 
ference should,  itself,  provide  for  its  reassem- 
bling at  stated  intervals  thereafter,  without 
waiting  for  the  specific  call  or  invitation  of  any 


22  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

monarch  or  national  executive.  The  history 
of  the  second  Hague  Conference  is  still  fresh 
in  our  minds.  Although  not  everything  was 
done  that  we  had  hoped  for,  yet  when  the  cloud 
of  discussion  lifted,  we  could  plainly  see  that 
long  steps  in  advance  had  been  taken,  and  that 
there  was  coming  to  be  a  more  fundamental 
and  far-reaching  agreement  among  the  nations 
as  to  what  was  wise  and  practicable  in  the 
steady  substitution  of  the  rule  of  justice  for  the 
rule  of  force  among  men. 

To-day,  however,  the  most  optimistic  ob- 
server of  the  movement  of  public  opinion  in  the 
world,  and  the  most  stoutly  convinced  advo- 
cate of  international  justice,  must  confess  him- 
self perplexed,  if  not  amazed,  by  some  of  the 
striking  phenomena  which  meet  his  view.  Ex- 
penditure for  naval  armaments  is  everywhere 
growing  by  leaps  and  bounds. 

Edmund  Burke  said  that  he  did  not  know 
the  method  of  drawing  up  an  indictment 
against  a  whole  people;  but  perhaps  it  may  be 
easier  to  detect  some  of  the  signs  of  emotional 
insanity  than  to  draw  an  indictment  for  crime. 
The  storm  center  of  the  world's  weather  to- 
day is  to  be  found  in  the  condition  of  mind 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  23 

of  a  large  portion  of  the  English  people.  The 
nation  which,  for  generations,  has  contributed 
so  powerfully  to  the  world's  progress  in  all  that 
relates  to  the  spread  of  the  rule  of  law,  to  the 
peaceful  development  of  commerce  and  indus- 
try, to  the  advancement  of  letters  and  science, 
and  to  the  spread  of  humanitarian  ideas,  ap- 
pears to  be  possessed  for  the  moment — it  can 
only  be  for  the  moment — with  the  evil  spirit 
of  militarism.  It  is  hard  to  reconcile  the  ex- 
cited and  exaggerated  utterances  of  responsible 
statesmen  in  Parliament  and  on  the  platform; 
the  loud  beating  of  drums  and  the  sounding  of 
alarums  in  the  public  press,  even  in  that  por- 
tion of  it  most  given  to  sobriety  of  judgment; 
and  the  flocking  of  the  populace  to  view  a  taw- 
dry and  highly  sensational  drama  of  less  than 
third-rate  importance  for  the  sake  of  its  con- 
tribution to  their  mental  obsession  by  hob- 
goblins and  the  ghosts  of  national  enemies  and 
invaders,  with  the  traditional  temperament  of 
a  nation  that  has  acclaimed  the  work  of  How- 
ard, Wilberforce,  and  Shaftesbury,  whose  pub- 
lic life  was  so  long  dominated  by  the  lofty  per- 
sonality of  William  Ewart  Gladstone,  and  of 
which  the  real  heroes  to-day  are  the  John  Mil- 


24  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

ton  and  the  Charles  Darwin  whose  anniver- 
saries are  just  now  celebrated  with  so  much 
sincerity  and  genuine  appreciation. 

What  has  happened  ?  If  an  opinion  may  be 
ventured  by  an  observer  whose  friendliness 
amounts  to  real  affection,  and  who  is  in  high 
degree  jealous  of  the  repute  of  the  English  peo- 
ple and  of  their  place  in  the  van  of  the  world's 
civilization,  it  is  that  this  lamentable  outburst 
is  attendant  upon  a  readjustment  of  relative 
position  and  importance  among  the  nations  of 
the  earth,  due  to  economic  and  intellectual 
causes,  which  readjustment  is  interpreted  in 
England,  unconsciously  of  course,  in  terms  of 
the  politics  of  the  first  Napoleon  rather  than 
in  terms  of  the  politics  of  the  industrial  and 
intelligent  democracies  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury. Germany  is  steadily  gaining  in  impor- 
tance in  the  world,  and  England  is  in  turn  los- 
ing some  of  her  long-standing  relative  primacy. 
The  causes  are  easy  to  discover,  and  are  in  no 
just  sense  provocative  of  war  or  strife.  In- 
deed, it  is  highly  probable  that  war,  if  it  should 
come  with  all  its  awful  consequences,  would 
only  hasten  the  change  it  was  entered  upon  to 
prevent. 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  25 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  while  there  has 
long  existed  in  Europe  a  German  people,  yet 
the  German  nation  as  such  is  a  creation  of  very 
recent  date.  With  the  substantial  completion 
of  German  political  unity  after  the  Franco- 
Prussian  war,  there  began  an  internal  develop- 
ment in  Germany  even  more  significant  and 
more  far-reaching  in  its  effects  than  that  which 
was  called  into  existence  by  the  trumpet  voice 
of  Fichte,  after  the  disastrous  defeat  of  the 
Prussian  army  by  Napoleon  at  Jena,  and  which 
was  guided  by  the  hands  of  Stein  and  Harden- 
berg.  This  later  development  has  been  funda- 
mentally economic  and  educational  in  char- 
acter, and  has  been  directed  with  great  skill 
toward  the  development  of  the  nation's  foreign 
commerce,  the  husbanding  of  its  own  natural 
resources,  and  the  comfort  and  health  of  the 
masses  of  its  rapidly  growing  population. 

Within  a  short  generation  the  pressure  of 
German  competition  has  been  severely  felt  in 
the  trade  and  commerce  of  every  part  of  the 
world.  The  two  most  splendid  fleets  engaged 
in  the  Atlantic  carrying  trade  fly  the  German 
flag.  Along  either  coast  of  South  America,  in 
the  waters  of  China  and  Japan,  in  the  ports  of 


26  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

the  Mediterranean,  and  on  the  trade  routes  to 
India  and  Australia,  the  German  flag  has  be- 
come almost  as  familiar  as  the  English.  The 
intensive  application  of  the  discoveries  of  theo- 
retical science  to  industrial  processes  has  made 
Germany,  in  a  sense,  the  world's  chief  teacher 
in  its  great  international  school  of  industry  and 
commerce.  With  this  over-sea  trade  expan- 
sion has  gone  the  building  of  a  German  navy. 
It  appears  to  be  the  building  of  this  navy  which 
has  so  excited  many  of  the  English  people.  For 
the  moment  we  are  not  treated  to  the  well-worn 
paradox  that  the  larger  a  nation's  navy  the  less 
likely  it  is  to  be  used  in  combat  and  the  more 
certain  is  the  peace  of  the  world.  The  old  Adam 
asserts  himself  long  enough  to  complain,  in  this 
case  at  least,  that  if  a  navy  is  building  in  Ger- 
many it  must  be  intended  for  offensive  use; 
and  against  whom  could  the  Germans  possibly 
intend  to  use  a  navy  except  against  England? 
Their  neighbors,  the  French  and  the  Russians, 
they  could  readily,  and  with  less  risk,  overrun 
with  their  great  army.  The  United  States  is 
too  far  away  to  enter  into  the  problem  as  a 
factor  of  any  real  importance.  Therefore,  the 
inference  is  drawn  that  the  navy  must  be  in- 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  27 

tended  for  an  attack  upon  England.  It  is  worth 
while  noting  that,  on  this  theory,  the  German 
navy  now  building  appears  to  be  the  first  of 
modern  navies  intended  for  military  uses.  It 
alone  of  all  the  world's  navies,  however  large, 
however  costly,  is  not  a  messenger  of  peace! 

One  must  needs  ask,  then,  what  reason  is  to 
be  found  in  the  nature  of  the  German  people, 
in  the  declarations  of  their  responsible  rulers,  or 
in  the  political  relations  between  Germany  and 
any  other  nation,  for  the  belief  that  the  German 
navy  alone,  among  all  modern  navies,  is  build- 
ing for  a  warlike  purpose?  Those  of  us  who 
feel  that  the  business  of  navy-building  is  being 
greatly  overdone,  and  that  it  cannot  for  a  mo- 
ment be  reconciled  with  sound  public  policy,  or 
with  the  increasingly  insistent  demand  for  social 
improvements  and  reforms,  may  well  wish  that 
the  German  naval  program  were  much  more 
restricted  than  it  is  and  that  some  of  the  un- 
official sayings  and  hopes  concerning  it  were  not 
expressed  at  all.  But,  waiving  that  point  for 
the  moment,  what  ground  is  there  for  the  sus- 
picion which  is  so  widespread  in  England  against 
Germany,  and  for  the  imputation  to  Germany 
of  evil  intentions  toward  England?  Speaking 


28  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

for  myself,  and  making  full  use  of  such  oppor- 
tunities for  accurate  information  as  I  have  had, 
I  say  with  entire  sincerity  that  I  do  not  believe 
there  is  any  ground  whatever  for  those  sus- 
picions or  for  those  imputations.  Nor,  what  is 
much  more  important,  has  adequate  ground  for 
those  suspicions  and  imputations  been  given  by 
any  responsible  person. 

Are  we  to  believe,  for  example,  that  the  whole 
public  life  in  both  Germany  and  England  is 
part  of  an  opera  bouffe,  and  that  all  the  public 
declarations  of  responsible  leaders  of  opinion  in 
both  countries  are  meaningless  or  untrue?  Are 
the  increasingly  numerous  international  visits 
of  municipal  officials,  of  clergymen,  of  teachers, 
of  trades  unionists,  of  newspaper  men,  as  well  as 
the  cordial  and  intimate  reception  given  them 
by  their  hosts,  all  a  sham  and  a  pretense?  Have 
all  these  men  daggers  in  their  hands  and  subtle 
poisons  in  their  pockets  ?  Are  we  to  assume  that 
there  is  no  truth  or  frankness  or  decency  left 
in  the  world  ?  Are  nations  in  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury, and  nations  that  represent  the  most  in 
modern  civilization  at  that,  so  lost  to  shame  that 
they  fall  upon  each  other's  necks  and  grasp  each 
other's  hands  and  swear  eternal  fealty  as  con- 


29 

ditions  precedent  to  making  an  unannounced 
attack  upon  each  other  during  a  fog?  Even 
the  public  morality  of  the  sixteenth  century 
would  have  revolted  at  that.  The  whole  idea 
is  too  preposterous  for  words,  and  it  is  the  duty 
of  the  thoughtful  and  sincere  friends  of  the  Eng- 
lish people,  in  this  country  and  in  every  country, 
to  use  every  effort  to  bring  them  to  see  the  un- 
reasonableness, to  use  no  stronger  term,  of  the 
attitude  toward  Germany  which  they  are  at 
present  made  to  assume  by  many  of  their 
spokesmen. 

But,  says  the  objector,  England  is  an  island 
nation.  Unless  she  commands  the  sea  abso- 
lutely her  national  existence  is  in  danger;  any 
strong  navy  in  hands  that  may  become  un- 
friendly threatens  her  safety.  Therefore  she 
is  justified  in  being  suspicious  of  any  nation  that 
builds  a  big  navy.  That  formula  has  been 
repeated  so  often  that  almost  everybody  be- 
lieves it.  There  was  a  time  when  it  was  probably 
and  within  limits  true.  One  cannot  but  wonder, 
however,  whether  it  is  unequivocally  true  any 
longer.  In  the  first  place,  national  existence 
does  not  now  depend  upon  military  and  naval 
force.  Italy  is  safe;  so  are  Holland  and  For- 


30  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

tugal,  Mexico  and  Canada.  Then,  the  possi- 
bilities of  aerial  navigation  alone,  with  the  re- 
sulting power  of  attacking  a  population  or  a 
fleet  huddled  beneath  a  cloud  of  monsters 
travelling  through  the  air  and  willing  to  risk 
their  own  existence  and  the  lives  of  their  occu- 
pants for  the  opportunity  to  approach  near 
enough  to  enable  a  vital  injury  to  be  inflicted 
upon  another  people,  to  say  nothing  of  the  en- 
ginery of  electricity,  have  changed  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  word  "island."  Although  an 
island  remains,  as  heretofore,  a  body  of  land  en- 
tirely surrounded  by  water,  yet  that  surround- 
ing water  is  no  longer  to  be  the  only  avenue  of 
approach  to  it,  its  possessions  and  its  inhabit- 
ants. Even  if  we  speak  in  the  most  approved 
language  of  militarism  itself,  it  is  apparent  that 
a  fleet  a  mile  wide  will  not  long  protect  England 
from  attack  or  invasion,  or  from  starvation,  if 
the  attacking  or  invading  party  is  in  command 
of  the  full  resources  of  modern  science  and 
modern  industry.  But  if  justice  be  substituted 
for  force,  England  will  always  be  safe;  her 
achievements  for  the  past  thousand  years  have 
made  that  certain. 

The  greatest  present  obstacle  to  the  limita- 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  31 

tion  of  the  armaments  under  the  weight  of 
which  the  world  is  staggering  toward  bank- 
ruptcy; the  greatest  obstacle  to  carrying  for- 
ward those  social  and  economic  reforms  for 
which  every  nation  is  crying  out,  that  its  pop- 
ulation may  be  better  housed,  the  public  health 
more  completely  protected,  and  the  burden  of 
unemployment  lifted  from  the  backs  of  the  wage- 
earning  classes,  appears  to  many  to  be  the  in- 
sistence by  England  on  what  is  called  the  two- 
power  naval  standard.  So  long  as  the  British 
Empire  circles  the  globe  and  so  long  as  its  ships 
and  its  goods  are  to  be  found  in  every  port,  the 
British  navy  will,  by  common  consent,  be  ex- 
pected to  be  much  larger  and  more  powerful 
than  that  of  any  other  nation.  Neither  in 
France  nor  in  Germany  nor  in  Japan  nor  in 
America  would  that  proposition  be  disputed. 
Even  the  two-power  standard  might  not  bring 
poverty  and  distress  and  wasteful  expenditure 
to  other  nations  if  naval  armaments  were  limited 
by  agreement  or  were  diminishing  in  strength. 
But,  insisted  upon  in  an  era  of  rapidly  increasing 
armaments,  in  this  day  of  Dreadnoughts,  the 
two-power  standard  leads,  and  must  inevitably 
lead,  to  huge  programs  of  naval  construction 


32  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

in  every  nation  where  the  patriotism  and  good 
sense  of  the  people  do  not  put  a  stop  to  this 
modern  form  of  madness.  The  practical  sense 
of  the  world  is  against  it;  only  so-called  expert 
theories  are  on  its  side. 

Under  the  prodding  of  alarmists  in  Parlia- 
ment and  the  press,  a  Liberal  ministry  has  been 
compelled  to  say  that  it  would  propose  and  sup- 
port measures  for  naval  aggrandizement  and 
expenditure  based  upon  the  principle  that  the 
fighting  strength  of  the  British  navy  must  be 
kept  always  one-tenth  greater  than  the  sum 
total  of  the  fighting  strength  of  the  two  next 
most  powerful  navies  in  the  world.  At  first  it 
was  even  proposed  to  include  the  navy  of  the 
United  States  in  making  this  computation. 
Later  that  position  was  fortunately  retreated 
from.  But  it  will  be  observed  that  in  computing 
the  so-called  two-power  standard,  the  English 
jingoes  count  as  contingent  enemies  the  French 
and  the  Japanese,  with  both  of  whom  their 
nation  is  in  closest  alliance,  and  also  the  Rus- 
sians, with  whom  the  English  are  now  on  terms 
of  cordial  friendship.  In  other  words,  unless 
all  such  treaties  of  alliance  and  comity  are  a 
fraud  and  a  sham,  these  nations  at  least  should 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  33 

be  omitted  from  the  reckoning.  This  would 
leave  no  important  navy  save  that  of  Germany 
to  be  counted  in  possible  opposition.  For  this 
reason,  it  is  just  now  alike  the  interest  and  the 
highest  opportunity  for  service  of  America  and 
of  the  world  to  bring  about  the  substitution  of 
cordial  friendship  between  England  and  Ger- 
many for  the  suspicion  and  distrust  which  so 
widely  prevail.  When  this  is  done,  a  long  step 
toward  an  international  agreement  for  the  limi- 
tation of  armaments  will  have  been  taken;  new 
progress  can  then  be  made  in  the  organization 
of  the  world  on  those  very  principles  for  which 
the  English  themselves  have  time-long  stood, 
and  for  whose  development  and  application  they 
have  made  such  stupendous  sacrifices  and  per- 
formed such  herculean  service. 

If  America  were  substituted  for  England,  it 
would  be  difficult  to  see  how  any  responsible 
statesman  who  had  read  the  majority  and  mi- 
nority reports  recently  laid  before  Parliament 
by  the  Poor  Law  Commission,  could  for  one 
moment  turn  aside  from  the  stern  duty  of  na- 
tional protection  against  economic,  educational, 
and  social  evils  at  home,  to  follow  the  will- 
o'-the-wisp  of  national  protection  against  a 


34  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

non-existent  foreign  enemy.  England  to-day, 
in  her  own  interest,  needs  to  know  Germany 
better;  to  learn  from  Germany,  to  study  with 
care  her  schools  and  universities,  her  system 
of  workingman's  insurance,  of  old  age  pen- 
sions, of  accident  insurance,  of  sanitary  and 
tenement  house  inspection  and  reform,  and  all 
her  other  great  social  undertakings,  rather  than 
to  spend  time  and  energy  and  an  impoverished 
people's  money  in  the  vain  task  of  preparing, 
by  monumental  expenditure  and  waste,  to 
meet  a  condition  of  international  enmity  which 
has  only  an  imaginary  existence.  It  is  the 
plain  duty  of  the  friends  of  both  England  and 
Germany — and  what  right-minded  man  is  not 
the  warm  friend  and  admirer  of  both  these 
splendid  peoples? — to  exert  every  possible  in- 
fluence to  promote  a  better  understanding  of 
each  of  these  peoples  by  the  other,  a  fuller  ap- 
preciation of  the  services  of  each  to  modern 
civilization,  and  to  point  out  the  folly,  not  to 
speak  of  the  wickedness,  of  permitting  the  seeds 
of  discord  to  be  sown  between  them  by  any 
element  in  the  population  of  either. 

I  like  to  think  that  the  real  England  and  the 
real  Germany  found  voice  on  the  occasion  of 


35 

a  charming  incident  which  it  was  my  privilege 
to  witness  in  September  of  last  year.  At  the 
close  of  the  impressive  meeting  of  the  Inter- 
parliamentary Union,  held  in  Berlin,  the  Ger- 
man Imperial  Chancellor  offered  the  gracious 
and  bountiful  hospitality  of  his  official  resi- 
dence to  the  hundreds  of  representatives  of 
foreign  parliamentary  bodies  then  gathered  in 
the  German  capital.  Standing  under  the 
spreading  trees  of  his  own  great  gardens,  sur- 
rounded by  the  leaders  of  German  scholarship 
and  of  German  political  thought,  Prince  von 
Billow  was  approached  by  more  than  two  score 
members  of  the  British  Parliament,  with  Lord 
Weardale  at  their  head.  In  a  few  impressive, 
eloquent,  and  low-spoken  sentences  Lord  Wear- 
dale  expressed  to  the  Chancellor  what  he  be- 
lieved to  be  the  real  feeling  of  England  toward 
Germany,  and  what  he  felt  should  be  the  real 
relationship  to  exist  between  the  two  govern- 
ments and  the  two  peoples.  In  words  equally 
cordial  and  quite  as  eloquent,  Prince  von  Billow 
responded  to  Lord  Weardale  with  complete 
sympathy  and  without  reserve.  The  incident 
made  a  deep  impression  upon  the  small  group 
who  witnessed  it.  It  was  over  in  a  few  min- 


36  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

utes.  It  received  no  record  in  the  public  press, 
but  in  my  memory  it  remains  as  a  weighty,  and 
I  hope  as  a  final,  refutation  of  the  widespread 
impression  that  England  and  Germany  are  at 
bottom  hostile,  and  are  drifting  inevitably 
toward  the  maelstrom  of  an  armed  conflict. 
What  could  more  surely  lead  to  conviction  of 
high  crimes  and  misdemeanors  at  the  bar  of 
history  than  for  two  culture-peoples,  with  po- 
litical and  intellectual  traditions  in  their  en- 
tirety unequaled  in  the  world's  history,  in  this 
twentieth  century  to  tear  each  other  to  pieces 
like  infuriated  gladiators  in  a  bloody  arena? 
The  very  thought  is  revolting,  and  the  mere 
suggestion  of  it  ought  to  dismay  the  civilized 
world. 

The  aim  of  all  rational  and  practicable  ac- 
tivity for  the  permanent  establishment  of  the 
world's  peace,  and  for  the  promotion  of  justice, 
is  and  must  always  be  the  education  of  the 
world's  public  opinion.  Governments,  however 
popular  and  however  powerful,  have  ceased  to 
dominate;  everywhere  public  opinion  domi- 
nates governments.  As  never  before,  public 
opinion  is  concerning  itself  with  the  solution 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  37 

of  grave  economic  and  social  questions  which 
must  be  solved  aright  if  the  great  masses  of  the 
world's  population  are  to  share  comfort  and 
happiness.  A  nation's  credit  means  the  gen- 
eral belief  in  its  ability  to  pay  in  the  future. 
That  nation  which  persistently  turns  away 
from  the  consideration  of  those  economic  and 
social  questions  upon  which  the  productive 
power  of  its  population  must  in  last  resort  de- 
pend, limits  and  eventually  destroys  its  own 
credit.  That  nation  which  insists,  in  response 
to  cries  more  or  less  inarticulate  and  to  formu- 
las more  or  less  outworn,  upon  spending  the 
treasure  taken  from  its  population  in  taxes 
upon  useless  and  wasteful  armaments,  hastens 
its  day  of  doom,  for  it  impairs  its  credit  or  ulti- 
mate borrowing  capacity  in  a  double  way.  It 
not  only  expends  unproductively  and  waste- 
fully  vast  sums  of  the  nation's  taxes,  but  it  sub- 
stitutes this  unproductive  and  wasteful  expen- 
diture for  an  expenditure  of  equal  amount, 
which  might  well  be  both  productive  and  up- 
lifting. The  alternative  to  press  upon  the  at- 
tention of  mankind  is  that  of  huge  armaments 
or  social  and  economic  improvement.  The 
world  cannot  have  both.  There  is  a  limit  to 


38  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

man's  capacity  to  yield  up  taxes  for  public  use. 
Economic  consumption  is  now  heavily  taxed 
everywhere.  Accumulated  wealth  is  being 
sought  out  in  its  hiding  places,  and  is  con- 
stantly being  loaded  with  a  heavier  burden. 
All  this  cannot  go  on  forever.  The  world  must 
choose  between  pinning  its  faith  to  the  symbols 
of  a  splendid  barbarism  and  devoting  its  energies 
to  the  tasks  of  an  enlightened  civilization. 

Despite  everything,  the  political  organiza- 
tion of  the  world  in  the  interest  of  peace  and 
justice  proceeds  apace.  The  movement  is  as 
sure  as  that  of  an  Alpine  glacier,  and  it  has  now 
become  much  more  easily  perceptible. 

There  is  to  be  established  at  The  Hague  be- 
yond any  question,  either  by  the  next  Hague 
Conference  or  before  it  convenes  by  the  lead- 
ing nations  of  the  world,  acting  along  the  lines 
of  the  principles  adopted  at  the  second  Hague 
Conference  two  years  ago,  a  high  court  of  in- 
ternational justice.  It  is  as  clearly  indicated  as 
anything  can  be  that  that  court  is  to  become 
the  supreme  court  of  the  nations  of  the  world. 

The  Interparliamentary  Union,  which  has 
within  a  few  weeks  adopted  a  permanent  form  of 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  39 

organization,  and  chosen  a  permanent  secretary, 
whose  headquarters  are  eventually  to  be  in  the 
Peace  Palace  at  The  Hague  itself— an  occurrence 
of  the  greatest  public  importance  which  has,  to 
my  knowledge,  received  absolutely  no  mention 
in  the  press — now  attracts  to  its  membership 
representatives  of  almost  every  parliamentary 
body  in  existence.  At  the  last  meeting  of  the 
Interparliamentary  Union,  held  in  Berlin,  the 
Parliament  of  Japan,  the  Russian  Duma,  and 
the  newly  organized  Turkish  Parliament,  were 
all  represented.  By  their  side  sat  impressive 
delegations  from  the  Parliaments  of  England, 
of  France,  of  Germany,  of  Austria-Hungary, 
of  Italy,  of  Belgium,  of  the  Netherlands,  and 
of  the  Scandinavian  nations,  as  well  as  eight  or 
ten  representatives  of  the  American  Congress. 
In  this  Interparliamentary  Union,  which  has 
now  passed  through  its  preliminary  or  experi- 
mental stage,  lies  the  germ  of  a  coming  fed- 
eration of  the  world's  legislatures  which  will  be 
established  in  the  not  distant  future,  and  whose 
powers  and  functions,  if  not  precisely  defined 
at  first,  will  grow  naturally  from  consultation 
to  that  authority  of  which  wisdom  and  justice 
can  never  be  divested.  Each  year  that  the  rep- 


40  TEE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

resentatives  of  a  national  parliament  sit  side 
by  side  with  the  representatives  of  the  parlia- 
ments of  other  nations,  look  their  colleagues 
in  the  face,  and  discuss  with  them  freely  and 
frankly  important  matters  of  international  con- 
cern, it  will  become  more  difficult  for  them  to 
go  back  and  vote  a  declaration  of  war  against 
the  men  from  whose  consultation  room  they 
have  but  just  come.  Among  honest  men,  fa- 
miliarity breeds  confidence,  not  contempt. 

Where,  then,  in  this  coming  political  or- 
ganization of  the  world,  is  the  international 
executive  power  to  be  found?  Granting  that 
we  have  at  The  Hague  an  international  court; 
granting  that  we  have  sitting,  now  at  one  na- 
tional capital  and  now  at  another,  what  may 
be  called  a  consultative  international  parlia- 
ment, in  what  direction  is  the  executive  au- 
thority to  be  looked  for?  The  answer  to  this 
vitally  important  question  has  been  indicated 
by  no  less  an  authority  than  Senator  Root,  in 
his  address  before  the  American  Society  of 
International  Law,  more  than  a  year  ago.  Mr. 
Root  then  referred  to  the  fact  that  because 
there  is  an  apparent  absence  of  sanction  for 
the  enforcement  of  the  rules  of  international 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  41 

law,  great  authorities  have  denied  that  those 
rules  are  entitled  to  be  classed  as  law  at  all.  He 
pointed  out  that  this  apparent  inability  to  exe- 
cute in  the  field  of  international  politics  a  rule 
agreed  upon  as  law,  seems  to  many  minds  to 
render  quite  futile  the  further  discussion  of  the 
political  organization  of  the  world.  Mr.  Root, 
however,  had  too  practical  as  well  as  too  pro- 
found a  mind  to  rest  content  with  any  such 
lame  and  impotent  conclusion.  He  went  on 
to  show,  as  he  readily  could,  that  nations  day 
by  day  yield  to  arguments  which  have  no  com- 
pulsion behind  them,  and  that  as  a  result  of 
such  argument  they  are  constantly  changing 
policies,  modifying  conduct,  and  offering  redress 
for  injuries.  Why  is  this?  Because,  as  Mr. 
Root  pointed  out,  the  public  opinion  of  the 
world  is  the  true  international  executive.  No 
law,  not  even  municipal  law,  can  long  be  effect- 
ive without  a  supporting  public  opinion.  It 
may  take  its  place  upon  the  statute  book,  all 
constitutional  and  legislative  requirements  hav- 
ing been  carefully  complied  with;  yet  it  may 
and  does  remain  a  dead  letter  unless  public 
opinion  cares  enough  about  it,  believes  enough 
in  it,  to  vitalize  it  and  to  make  it  real. 


42  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

In  this  same  direction  lies  the  highest  hope 
of  civilization.  What  the  world's  public  opin- 
ion demands  of  nations  or  of  international  con- 
ferences, it  will  get.  What  the  world's  public 
opinion  is  determined  to  enforce,  will  be  en- 
forced. The  occasional  brawler  and  disturber 
of  the  peace  in  international  life  will  one  day 
be  treated  as  is  the  occasional  brawler  and 
disturber  of  the  peace  in  the  streets  of  a  great 
city.  The  aim  of  this  Conference,  and  of  every 
gathering  of  like  character,  must  insistently 
and  persistently  be  the  education  of  the  public 
opinion  of  the  civilized  world. 

The  world  is  being  politically  organized  while 
we  are  talking  about  it,  and  wondering  how  it 
is  to  be  done  and  when  it  is  to  come  to  pass. 
Little  by  little  the  steps  are  taken,  now  in  the 
formulation  of  a  treaty,  now  in  the  instructions 
given  to  representatives  at  an  international  con- 
ference, now  in  the  new  state  of  mind  brought 
about  by  the  participation  in  international  gath- 
erings and  the  closer  study  of  international 
problems,  until  one  day  the  world  will  be  sur- 
prised to  find  how  far  it  has  traveled  by  these 
successive  short  steps.  We  need  not  look  for 


AND  PUBLIC  OPINION  43 

any  great  revolutionary  or  evolutionary  move- 
ments that  will  come  suddenly.  A  revolution- 
ary movement  would  not  be  desirable,  and  evo- 
lutionary movements  do  not  come  in  that  way. 
Slowly,  here  a  little,  there  a  little,  line  upon  line, 
and  precept  upon  precept,  will  the  high  ethical 
and  political  ideals  of  civilized  man  assert  them- 
selves and  take  on  such  forms  as  may  be  neces- 
sary to  their  fullest  accomplishment. 

We  Americans  have  a  peculiar  responsibility 
toward  the  political  organization  of  the  world. 
Whether  we  recognize  it  or  not  we  are  univer- 
sally looked  to,  if  not  to  lead  in  this  undertak- 
ing, at  least  to  contribute  powerfully  toward  it. 
Our  professions  and  our  principles  are  in  accord 
with  the  highest  hopes  of  mankind.  We  owe 
it  to  ourselves,  to  our  reputation,  and  to  our  in- 
fluence, that  we  do  not  by  our  conduct  belie 
those  principles  and  those  professions;  that  we 
do  not  permit  selfish  interests  to  stir  up  among 
us  international  strife  and  ill-feeling;  that  we 
do  not  permit  the  noisy  boisterousness  of  irre- 
sponsible youth,  however  old  in  years  or  how- 
ever high  in  place,  to  lead  us  into  extravagant 
expenditure  foi  armies  and  navies;  and  that, 
most  of  all,  we  shall  cultivate  at  home  and  in 


44  THE  WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS 

our  every  relation,  national  and  international, 
that  spirit  of  justice  which  we  urge  so  valiantly 
upon  others.  Si  vis  pacem,  para  pacem! 


Ill 

ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS? 


•Opening  Address  as  Chairman  of  the  Lake  Mohonk  Con- 
ference on  International  Arbitration,  May  18,  1910 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS? 

No  well-informed  observer  is  likely  to  deny 
that  the  cause  which  this  Conference  is  assem- 
bled to  promote  has  made  important  progress 
during  the  past  year.  The  several  striking  in- 
cidents which  mark  that  progress — including, 
in  particular,  the  identic  circular  note  of  Sec- 
retary Knox  bearing  date  October  18,  1909, 
proposing  the  investment  of  the  International 
Prize  Court  with  the  functions  of  a  court  of 
arbitral  justice,  and  the  hearty  approval  which 
the  proposal  has  met;  the  public  declaration  of 
President  Taft,  made  in  New  York  on  March 
22,  1910,  that  there  are  no  questions  involving 
the  honor  or  the  interests  of  a  civilized  nation 
which  it  may  not  with  propriety  submit  to 
judicial  determination;  the  action  of  the  Con- 
gress in  making  an  appropriation  for  the  Bureau 
of  the  Interparliamentary  Union  for  the  Pro- 
motion of  International  Arbitration,  thus  com- 
mitting the  United  States  Government  officially 
to  that  admirable  undertaking;  and,  finally, 

47 


48  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

the  forthcoming  submission  to  the  arbitral  tri- 
bunal at  The  Hague  of  the  century-old  contro- 
versy between  Great  Britain  and  the  United 
States  as  to  the  Newfoundland  fisheries — all 
these  are  encouraging  in  high  degree.  To  those 
who  are  impatient  for  the  attainment  of  our 
ideal  we  can  only  say  that  progress  toward  it 
is  steadily  making  and  that  the  chief  forces 
now  at  work  in  the  world,  political,  economic, 
and  ethical,  are  co-operating  with  us  to  bring 
about  its  attainment.  To  those  who  fear  that 
we  may  make  progress  too  fast  and  that  some 
measure  of  national  security  will  be  sacrificed 
in  pushing  forward  to  establish  international 
justice,  we  can  only  say  that  justice  is  itself 
the  one  real  and  continuing  ground  of  security 
for  both  men  and  nations,  and  that  heretofore 
in  the  history  of  mankind  the  devil  has  always 
been  able  to  take  care  of  his  own  cause  without 
the  necessary  aid  and  comfort  of  the  forces  in 
the  world  that  are  aiming  at  the  overthrow  of 
the  rule  of  any  power  but  right. 

The  chief  danger  that  we  practical  persons 
run  in  our  endeavor  to  accomplish  a  practical 
end  in  a  practical  way  against  the  opposition 
of  the  dreams  and  illusions  of  theorists  who, 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS?  49 

groping  as  in  a  fog,  assume  that  mankind  must 
be  forever  ruled  by  brute  force  and  cruelty  and 
lust  for  power  and  for  gain,  is  that  we  may  fail 
to  recognize  that  the  cause  of  international  jus- 
tice rests  upon  and  is  part  of  a  complete  philoso- 
phy of  life.  It  cannot  be  advocated  or  conceived 
as  something  that  stands  apart  from  and  in  no 
relation  to  our  modes  of  thinking  and  acting, 
whether  as  individuals  or  as  nations,  in  respect 
to  all  interests  and  to  all  problems.  To  some  it 
may  appear  to  make  our  task  more  difficult,  to 
others  it  may  seem  to  make  it  more  easy,  when 
we  say  that  this  task  is  nothing  less  than  part 
and  parcel  of  the  moral  education  and  regener- 
ation of  mankind.  To  suppose  that  men  and 
women  into  whose  intellectual  and  moral  in- 
struction and  upbuilding  have  gone  the  glories 
of  the  world's  philosophy  and  art  and  poetry 
and  religion,  into  whose  lives  have  been  poured 
for  two  thousand  years  the  precepts  and  the 
inspiration  of  the  Christian  religion,  over  whose 
daily  conduct  have  been  thrown  since  the  days 
of  Draco  and  of  Solon  the  restraints  of  law  and 
of  consideration  for  the  rights  and  property  of 
others — to  suppose  that  these  men  and  women, 
when  gathered  together  in  groups  called  nations, 


50  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

speaking  a  common  language  called  a  mother 
tongue  and  owing  allegiance  to  a  definite  set  of 
political  institutions  called  a  government,  are, 
when  matters  of  dispute  and  difficulty  and  doubt 
arise,  to  fly  at  each  other's  throats,  to  burn,  to 
ravage,  to  kill,  in  the  hope  of  somehow  estab- 
lishing thereby  truth  and  right  and  justice,  is 
to  suppose  the  universe  to  be  stood  upon  its 
apex,  to  suppose  the  onward  sweep  of  human 
progress  to  be  toward  bestiality  and  bedlam, 
and  to  suppose  the  teachings  of  religion  and  of 
morals,  the  inspiration  of  poetry,  of  painting, 
and  of  song,  to  be  to  the  end  that  we  may  be 
made  ready  for  new  acts  of  valorous  ferocity 
and  carnage.  Who,  I  pray  you,  are  the  dream- 
ers, who  are  the  theorists — those  who  appeal  to 
the  rule  of  justice  or  those  who  appeal  to  the 
rule  of  brute  force? 

Let  us  not  be  mistaken  about  all  this.  Men 
who  are  themselves  preying  upon  the  public 
interest  from  private  station  or  from  public 
office  are  not  going  to  be  the  first  to  urge  the 
cause  of  international  justice.  The  men  who 
cannot  succeed  in  holding  in  check  their  own 
tempers,  their  own  lusts,  and  their  own  greed, 
are  not  going  to  cry  out  for  the  establishment 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS?    51 

of  an  international  court  of  arbitration.  We 
have  set  out  in  this  undertaking — now  perfectly 
certain  of  accomplishment  at  a  date  no  longer 
remote — without  the  aid  and  comfort  of  those 
elements  of  the  world's  population.  Moreover, 
we  are  not  likely  to  gain  much  assistance  from 
the  cynical  observer  of  his  kind  whose  faith  is 
not  adequate  to  the  entire  observation  of  his- 
tory and  of  men.  His  keen  vision  and  quick 
wit  see  readily  enough  the  bad  and  selfish  side 
of  public  and  of  private  life,  and  he  contents 
himself  with  a  jeer  and  a  sneer  at  those  who  pro- 
pose to  turn  that  life  inside  out. 

Some  of  these  elements  are  elements  of  in- 
difference, some  are  elements  of  active  opposi- 
tion. To  those  who  represent  the  element  of 
indifference  I  cheerfully  accord  the  most  power- 
ful place  among  the  opponents  and  obstacles  of 
our  program.  Those  who  are  in  active  oppo- 
sition need  not  detain  us  long.  The  assump- 
tions which  are  their  grotesque  substitutes  for 
argument  and  the  fallacies  which  they  hug  to 
their  several  bosoms  as  illustrations  of  perfect 
logic,  are  too  easily  confuted  to  make  them  dan- 
gerous. Not  many  men  have  courage  enough 
to  go  through  the  world  shouting  that  war  is 


52    ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

a  virtue  and  should  be  actively  promoted 
by  all  moral  and  upright  men.  The  few  who 
do  so  live  in  a  world  of  sentiment  and  false 
emotions;  they  do  not  know  or  face  the  real 
facts.  It  is  to  the  everlasting  glory  and  honor 
of  the  world's  greatest  soldiers  in  modern  times 
that  they  have  always  put  peace  above  war  and 
that  they  have  done  their  best,  by  ability  and 
courage  and  skill,  to  bring  to  a  prompt  end  the 
wars  in  which  they  found  themselves  engaged 
in  order  that  the  blessings  of  peace  might  once 
more  be  spread  over  the  land.  There  is  no  one 
who  so  appreciates  the  significance  of  the  judi- 
cial settlement  of  international  differences  as 
the  brave  soldier  or  sailor  who,  at  his  country's 
command,  has  done  his  best  to  settle  those  dif- 
ferences by  display  or  exercise  of  force. 

There  is  one  other  type  of  citizen  who  must 
be  mentioned,  because  the  type  is  numerous, 
influential,  and  important.  This  is  the  type 
which  holds  the  view  that,  of  course,  interna- 
tional arbitration  is  a  thing  greatly  to  be  de- 
sired; of  course,  we  must  all  hope  for  the  day 
when  that  at  present  distant,  impracticable,  and 
wholly  praiseworthy  ideal  shall  be  reached;  but 
that,  until  that  day — which  is  probably  to  be 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ?    53 

the  Greek  Kalends — we  must  continue  to  tax 
our  great  modern  industrial  nations,  struggling 
as  they  are  under  the  burdens  of  popular  edu- 
cation and  of  economic  and  social  betterment, 
in  order  that  death-dealing  instrumentalities 
may  be  increased  and  multiplied  and  the  several 
nations  thereby  protected  from  invasion  and 
attack.  This  procedure,  so  the  curious  argu- 
ment runs,  is  to  hasten  the  coming  of  interna- 
tional arbitration  and  to  promote  it.  Civilized 
men,  it  appears,  are  to  be  shot  or  starved  into 
agreeing  to  arbitrate. 

This  point  of  view  requires  for  adequate  treat- 
ment, not  the  arguments  of  a  logician,  but  the 
pencil  of  a  Tenniel  or  the  caustic  wit  of  a  Mr. 
Dooley.  Look  at  the  situation  in  the  world 
to-day  as  this  type  of  man  presents  it  to  us.  Of 
course,  the  United  States  is  a  peaceful  nation; 
of  course,  Great  Britain  is  a  peaceful  nation; 
of  course,  Germany  and  France  and  Japan 
are  peaceful  nations;  but  therefore,  because 
they  propose  to  attack  nobody  they  must  so 
strengthen  their  defences,  so  multiply  their 
navies  and  increase  their  armies,  that  nobody 
can  successfully  attack  them.  Who,  pray,  is 
left  to  attack  these  peaceful  and  law-abiding 


54  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

nations  if,  as  we  are  assured  by  everybody — 
both  leaders  of  governments,  the  moulders  of 
public  opinion,  and  the  substantially  unanimous 
press  of  the  world — they  do  not  propose  to  at- 
tack each  other,  unless  it  be  an  army  of  white 
bears  from  the  newly-discovered  North  Pole  or 
a  procession  of  elephants  and  camelopards  from 
the  jungles  of  Central  Africa  ?  The  gullibility  of 
mankind  was  never  more  conclusively  demon- 
strated than  by  the  widespread  acceptance  of 
this  huge  joke,  which,  unlike  most  other  jokes, 
has  to  be  paid  for  at  a  literally  stupendous  price. 
Children  must  go  untaught,  sanitary  inspection 
and  regulation  must  go  unprovided,  better  work- 
ingmen's  dwellings  must  be  postponed,  provi- 
sions for  recreation  and  enlightenment  must 
be  put  off,  conditions  accompanying  labor,  pov- 
erty, and  old  age  must  go  indefinitely  without 
amelioration,  in  order  that  in  this  twentieth 
century  men  and  nations,  who,  looking  in  the 
glass,  call  themselves  intelligent  and  practical, 
may  support,  maintain,  and  propagate  this 
stupendous  joke!  Either  the  whole  world  is 
being  deluded  by  a  witticism  of  cosmic  propor- 
tions or  some  important  persons  are  conspiring 
to  tell  an  awful  lie. 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS?  55 

I  am  one  of  those  who  look  for  the  simplest 
motives  in  explanation  of  action  or  of  conduct. 
My  impression  is  that  somebody  makes  some- 
thing by  reason  of  the  huge  expenditures  in 
preparation  for  war.  Have  you  ever  noticed 
that  about  the  time  that  the  appropriations  for 
military  purposes  are  under  consideration  in  the 
Congress,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  in  the 
Chamber  of  Deputies,  or  in  the  Reichstag,  or 
just  before  such  a  time,  hostilities  are  always  on 
the  point  of  breaking  out  in  two  or  three  parts 
of  the  world  at  once?  Just  at  these  times  war 
prophets  begin  to  see  visions  and  to  dream 
dreams,  and  the  poor,  gullible  people  rush  off 
to  their  cyclone  cellars  and  shout  timorously  to 
their  representatives  to  vote  at  once  and  as 
much  as  possible  in  order  that  great  ships  and 
guns  and  forts  may  be  built  to  protect  them  from 
their  fears.  We  have  done  of  late  some  help- 
ful and  illuminating  legislative  inquiry  in  this 
country.  It  might  be  worth  while  to  have  the 
same  sort  of  ability  that  has  so  brilliantly  ex- 
posed to  our  repelled  and  astonished  gaze  other 
forms  of  political  chicanery  and  graft,  make 
some  measurement  of  the  sincerity  and  disin- 
terestedness of  the  lively  type  of  patriotism 


56  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

which  accompanies  these  military  and  naval  de- 
bates the  world  over.  Is  the  propelling  motive 
for  them  to  be  found  in  economics  or  in  psy- 
chology? My  strong  impression  is  that  while 
both  of  those  admirable  sciences  are  represented 
in  the  make-up  of  that  propelling  motive,  eco- 
nomics is  not  always  the  less  important  of  the 
two. 

Patriotism  is  a  noble  and  a  lofty  virtue,  but 
it  is  worth  while  always  to  remember  the  sa- 
gacious observation  of  Dr.  Johnson,  which  Bos- 
well  so  faithfully  reports.  "Patriotism  hav- 
ing become  one  of  our  topics,"  says  Boswell, 
"Johnson  suddenly  uttered  in  a  strong,  deter- 
mined tone,  an  apothegm  at  which  many  will 
start :  '  Patriotism  is  the  last  refuge  of  a  scoun- 
drel."!  "But  let  it  be  considered,"  continues 
Boswell,  "that  he  did  not  mean  a  real  and  gen- 
erous love  of  our  country,  but  that  pretended 
patriotism  which  so  many  in  all  ages  and  coun- 
tries have  made  a  cloak  for  self-interest." 

What  is  needed  is  to  leave  off  deluding  our- 
selves with  phrases,  with  shams,  and  with  false 
historical  analogies  and  to  look  the  facts  as  they 
are  in  the  face.  Not  everything  that  we  wish 
lBosweU's  "Life  of  Johnson"  (Oxford,  1906),  I,  583. 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ?  57 

for  will  be  accomplished  at  once  or  suddenly. 
Moral  regeneration  is  an  even  slower  and  more 
difficult  process  than  intellectual  upbuilding; 
but  custom  and  habit  are  powerful  allies  and 
the  world's  imagination  is  fast  becoming  accus- 
tomed to  the  judicial  settlement  of  international 
differences.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  whose  opinions  are  so  often  luminous 
with  sound  political  philosophy,  has  declared 
that  "the  right  to  sue  and  defend  in  the  courts 
is  the  alternative  of  force.  In  an  organized  so- 
ciety it  is  the  right  conservative  of  all  other 
rights  and  lies  at  the  foundation  of  orderly  gov- 
ernment. It  is  one  of  the  highest  and  most 
essential  privileges  of  citizenship  and  must  be 
allowed  by  each  State  to  the  citizens  of  all  other 
States  to  the  precise  extent  that  it  is  allowed 
to  its  own  citizens."  2  In  making  this  statement 
of  fundamental  principle,  the  Supreme  Court 
had  in  mind  the  rights  of  individuals  and  the 
States  which  are  bound  together  in  our  Union. 
But  what  is  there  in  that  statement  of  fun- 
damental principle  which  may  not  logically, 
ethically,  and  practically  be  applied  to  the 
rights  of  nations,  great  and  small,  bound  to- 

8 "United  States  Reports,"  207:  148. 


58    ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

gather  by  treaties  and  interdependences  of  every 
kind  into  a  great  world  commonwealth? 

The  harder  we  press  our  adversaries  and 
critics  on  this  point  the  less  satisfactory  do  their 
answers  become.  To  say  that  men  have  always, 
as  a  last  resort,  settled  their  differences  and  diffi- 
culties by  force  and  that  therefore  they  will 
always  continue  to  do  so,  is  simply  silly.  To 
say  that  a  nation's  honor  must  be  defended  by 
the  blood  of  her  citizens  if  need  be,  is  quite 
meaningless,  for  such  a  nation,  although  pro- 
foundly right  in  its  contention,  might  be  de- 
feated by  superior  force  exerted  on  behalf  of 
a  wrong  and  unjust  view.  What  becomes  of 
national  honor  then?  It  would  appear  that  a 
nation's  honor  can  only  be  entrusted  either  to 
the  operations  of  the  established  principles  of 
justice  or  to  a  force  so  overwhelming  that  no 
adversary  could  stand  against  it.  This  is  in- 
deed the  dilemma  which  confronts  the  civilized 
world  to-day:  either  the  judicial  settlement  of 
international  differences  must  be  accepted  as  a 
universal  principle  or  the  world  must  become 
a  series  of  armed  camps  sucking  up  like  a  vam- 
pire, in  vain  and  competitive  expenditure,  the 
very  blood  of  the  people's  economic  and  polit- 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ?  59 

ical  life.  The  one  road  leads  to  civilization,  to 
international  comity,  to  concord,  and  to  peace; 
the  other  leads  back  to  barbarism,  to  discord, 
to  contention,  and  to  war.  Which  will  mankind 
choose  as  a  permanent  policy?  From  which 
vantage-point  will  appeal  be  made  to  the  sober 
judgment  of  history?  From  that  of  justice  or 
from  that  of  armed  force  ? 

There  are  those,  mostly  philosophers  of  the 
closet  sort,  who  could  never  be  induced  to  ex- 
pose themselves  to  the  physical  dangers  of  war, 
who  pretend  to  believe  that  unless  we  have  fre- 
quent and  destructive  wars  the  population  of 
the  world  will  not  be  held  sufficiently  in  check, 
and  that,  sooner  or  later,  the  earth's  spaces  will 
be  crowded  by  peaceful,  but  undesirable,  per- 
sons for  whose  activities  there  is  no  adequate 
room.  One  may  or  may  not  be  disposed  to  deal 
seriously  with  this  contention;  I  am  not  so 
disposed. 

There  still  remain  those  who  fear  that  with- 
out conflict  there  will  be  no  proper  training- 
school  for  the  sterner  virtues  of  mankind  and 
that  courage,  bravery,  and  patriotism  will 
atrophy  unless  exercised  from  time  to  time  in 
war  and  conflict.  A  very  interesting  essay 


60  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

might  be  written  on  this  topic  and  on  the  dis- 
cipline and  encouragement  which  the  sterner 
virtues  receive  in  the  daily  round  of  domestic, 
business,  and  personal  life  as  well  as  in  the 
thousand  and  one  acts  of  helpfulness  and  gener- 
osity and  sacrifice  by  which  the  sweetest,  as  well 
as  the  strongest,  characters  in  this  world  are 
made.  It  is  hard  to  listen  with  patience  to 
the  rattling  rhetoric  of  him  who  would  trace 
back  the  sterner  virtues  to  mere  brute  instincts 
and  who  would  strive  to  hold  them  there.  The 
teachings  of  religion  and  of  morals  have  left 
quite  untouched  any  man  who  can  seriously 
suppose  that  without  practice  in  the  exercise 
of  brute  force  there  can  be  no  strength. 

One  of  the  earliest  questions  recorded  in  his- 
tory is  the  petulant  query  of  Cain,  "Am  I  my 
brother's  keeper?"  On  the  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion all  civilization  depends.  If  man  is  not  his 
brother's  keeper,  if  he  may  slay  and  rob  and 
ravage  at  will  for  his  own  advantage,  whether 
that  be  personal  or  national,  then  civilization 
becomes  quite  impossible.  It  is  vain  to  attempt 
to  divert  us  by  analogies  drawn  from  the  past 
history  of  the  race.  Mankind  has  been  climbing 
upward  and  neither  standing  on  a  level  nor  go- 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ?    61 

ing  down  hill.  Acts,  policies,  and  events  which 
are  easily  explainable  and  in  large  part  de- 
fensible in  other  days  and  under  other  condi- 
tions are  neither  explainable  nor  defensible  now. 
The  twentieth  century  cannot  afford  to  receive 
its  lessons  in  morals,  whether  personal  or  na- 
tional, from  the  fifteenth  or  the  sixteenth.  We 
are  our  brothers'  keepers  and  they  are  ours. 
The  whole  world  has  become  a  brotherhood  of 
fellow-citizens.  The  barriers  of  language  are 
slowly  breaking  down;  wars  of  religion  are  al- 
most unheard  of;  distance  in  space  and  time 
has  been  practically  annihilated  by  steam  and 
electricity;  trade  is  as  easy  to-day  between 
New  York  and  Calcutta  or  between  London 
and  Hong  Kong  as  it  once  was  between  two 
neighboring  shops  in  the  bazaars  of  Damascus 
on  either  side  of  the  street  called  straight.  What 
possible  reason  is  there  why  the  fundamental 
principles  which  civilization  applies  to  the  set- 
tlement of  differences  between  individuals  can- 
not now  be  applied  to  the  settlement  of  differ- 
ences between  nations? 

We  may  well  take  satisfaction  in  the  contri- 
bution which  our  government  has  made  in  re- 


62  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

cent  years  toward  the  progress  of  the  movement 
for  the  judicial  settlement  of  international  dif- 
ferences. Hand  in  hand  with  these  contribu- 
tions there  should  go,  however,  the  resultant 
refusal  farther  to  increase  and  expand  arma- 
ments on  land  and  sea,  and  a  more  complete 
control  over  the  provocative  and  annoying  ex- 
pressions of  opinion  in  regard  to  other  nations 
and  other  forms  of  government  than  our  own. 
Let  me  add  a  final  word  or  two  as  to  each 
of  these  matters.  There  is  a  broad  distinction 
between  proposals  for  disarmament  and  pro- 
posals for  the  limitation  of  armaments.  When 
a  nation  like  the  United  States,  holding  the 
views  which  its  people  profess  and  which  its 
government  constantly  voices,  has,  as  it  now  has, 
a  navy  and  the  nucleus  of  an  army  entirely  ade- 
quate for  purposes  of  defence,  a  stop  should  be 
put  to  the  farther  increase  of  armaments.  It 
is  urged  in  opposition  that  no  nation  can  afford 
to  take  this  step  alone  and  that  until  an  inter- 
national agreement  for  the  limitation  of  arma- 
ments is  arrived  at,  each  great  nation  must  press 
forward,  at  whatever  cost,  to  multiply  the  pro- 
visions for  its  armed  forces.  However  plausible 
this  argument  may  be  when  addressed  to  a  Eu- 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ?    63 

ropean  nation,  it  fails  entirely  when  addressed 
to  the  United  States.  If  the  best  way  to  resume 
was  to  resume — and  we  learned  by  experience 
in  1879  that  it  was — then  the  best  way  to  limit 
armaments  is  to  limit  them.  In  this  policy  the 
United  States  has  not  only  nothing  to  lose,  but 
everything  to  gain,  by  leading  the  way.  It  is  no 
small  satisfaction  to  point  out  that  increasing 
support  for  this  view  is  to  be  found  in  the  public 
opinion  of  the  country,  reflected  both  in  the  de- 
bates and  votes  in  the  Congress  as  well  as  in  the 
more  influential  portion  of  the  newspaper  press. 
There  remains  the  matter  of  what  may  be 
called  petulant  and  teasing  criticism  on  the 
platform  and  in  the  press  of  the  acts  and  poli- 
cies of  nations  other  than  our  own.  A  good 
many  nations  and  peoples  have,  in  the  history  of 
the  world,  assumed  for  themselves  an  attitude 
of  superiority  toward  their  fellows,  and  have 
shaped  their  beliefs  and  their  practices  accord- 
ingly. It  will  not  be  generally  thought,  I  fancy, 
that  the  historic  results  of  this  course  of  con- 
duct have  been  either  fortunate  or  happy.  The 
fair,  as  well  as  the  wise,  method  to  pursue  in 
criticism  and  comment  upon  happenings  else- 
where is  to  assume  an  intelligent  purpose,  a 


64  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

good  will,  and  a  lofty  motive  on  the  part  of  the 
foreigner,  until  the  contrary  is  definitely  proven. 
An  attitude  of  international  disdain  is  not  be- 
coming to  statesmen,  to  journalists,  or  to  pri- 
vate citizens.  The  history  of  civilization  might 
be  written  in  terms  of  man's  progress  from  fear 
to  faith.  As  he  has  ceased  to  fear  his  neighbors 
and  as  he  has  come  to  have  trust  in  them,  he 
has  been  able  to  build  up  institutions  that  have 
lasted.  Just  as  the  individual  has  substituted 
faith  in  his  fellow-man  for  fear  of  him,  so 
nations  may  well  divest  themselves  of  fear  in 
favor  of  faith  in  the  other  nations  of  the  world. 
The  United  States  has  done  so  much  to  edu- 
cate world  opinion  in  the  past  century  and  a 
half  that  we  may  well  be  ambitious  for  it  to  do 
still  more.  We  have  shown  that  to  all  appear- 
ances a  federal  form  of  government,  extended 
over  a  wide  area  and  embracing  many  competing 
and  sometimes  conflicting  interests,  is  practi- 
cable, and  that  it  can  survive  even  the  severe 
shock  of  civil  war.  We  have  shown  that  under 
the  guidance  of  a  written  Constitution,  judicially 
interpreted,  there  is  room  for  national  growth 
and  expansion,  for  stupendous  economic  de- 
velopment, for  absorption  into  the  body  politic 


ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ?  65 

of  large  numbers  of  foreign  born,  and  for  the 
preservation  of  civil  liberty  over  a  considerable 
period  of  time.  Suppose  now  that  during  the 
next  few  decades  it  might  be  given  to  us  to  lead 
the  way  in  demonstrating  to  the  world  that 
great  sovereign  nations,  like  federated  states, 
may^live  and  grow  and  do  business  together  in 
harmony  and  unity,  without  strife  or  armed  con- 
flict, through  the  habit  of  submitting  to  judicial 
determination  all  questions  of  difference  as  they 
may  arise,  the  judicial  decree  when  made  to  be 
supported  and  enforced — after  the  fashion  in 
which  judicial  decrees  are  everywhere  supported 
and  enforced — by  intelligent  public  opinion  and 
by  an  international  and  neutral  police.  Might 
we  not  then  be  justified  in  believing  that  the 
place  of  our  beloved  country  in  history  was 
secure  ? 

What  more  splendid  foundation  could  there 
be  upon  which  to  build  an  enduring  monument 
to  the  American  people  than  their  guarantee 
and  preservation  of  civil  liberty  together  with 
national  development  at  home,  and  their  lead- 
ership in  establishing  the  world's  peace  together 
with  international  development  all  around  the 
globe?  Dare  we  leave  anything  undone  to  put 


66  ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS  ? 

our  own  land  in  the  place  of  highest  honor  by 
reason  of  its  contribution  to  the  establishment 
of  the  world's  peace  and  order  and  happiness 
through  the  rule  of  justice — a  rule  accepted 
because  it  is  just  and  bowed  down  to  because  it 
is  right?  What  picture  of  glory  and  of  honor 
has  the  advocate  of  brute  force  to  offer  us  in 
exchange  for  this? 

The  great  movement  in  which  we  are  en- 
gaged is  all  part  and  parcel  of  a  new  way  of 
life.  It  means  that  we  must  enter  with  fulness 
of  appreciation  into  the  activities  and  interests 
of  peoples  other  than  ourselves;  that  we  must 
always  and  everywhere  emulate  the  best  they 
have  to  teach  us  and  shun  the  worst;  that  we 
must  answer  in  no  uncertain  tones  that  we  are 
our  brothers'  keepers;  and  that,  as  with  men 
so  with  nations,  the  path  of  justice,  of  integ- 
rity, and  of  fair  dealing  is  the  true  path  of 
honor.  Let  us  see  to  it  that  we  Americans 
tread  steadily  in  it. 


IV 


THE   EDUCATION  OF  THE  WORLD 
FOR   PEACE 


Opening  Address  as  Chairman  of  the  Lake  Mohonk  Con- 
ference on  International  Arbitration,  May  24,  1911 


THE  EDUCATION  OF  THE  WORLD 
FOR  PEACE 

The  reassembling  of  this  Conference  for  its 
seventeenth  annual  session  takes  place  at  a  mo- 
ment and  under  circumstances  when  our  feel- 
ings of  exhilaration  and  enthusiasm  run  high. 
Never  before  has  the  mind  of  the  world  been  so 
occupied  with  the  problems  of  substituting  law 
for  war,  peace  with  righteousness  for  triumph 
after  slaughter,  the  victories  of  right  and  reason- 
ableness for  those  of  might  and  brute  force.  It 
begins  to  look  as  if  the  stone  of  Sisyphus  that 
has  so  often  been  rolled  with  toil  and  tribulation 
almost  to  the  top  of  the  hill,  only  to  break  loose 
and  roll  again  to  the  bottom,  is  now  in  a  fair 
way  to  be  carried  quite  to  the  summit.  The 
long  years  of  patient  argument  and  exhortation 
and  of  painstaking  instruction  of  public  opinion 
in  this  and  other  countries  are  bearing  fruit  in 
full  measure.  In  response  to  imperative  de- 
mands of  public  opinion,  responsible  govern- 
ments and  cabinet  ministers  are  just  now  dili- 
gently busying  themselves  with  plans  which  but 

69 


70  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

a  short  time  ago  were  derided  as  impractical  and 
visionary.  Even  the  genial  cynic,  whom,  like 
the  poor,  we  have  always  with  us,  is  quiescent 
for  the  moment.  But  a  new  adversary  has  been 
lured  from  his  lurking  place.  Arguments  are 
now  making,  in  publications  not  wholly  given 
over  to  humorous  writing,  that  war  and  the 
preparations  for  war  must  not  be  harshly  and 
rudely  interfered  with  by  the  establishment  of 
international  courts  of  justice,  because  these 
wars  are  part  of  the  divine  order  of  the  universe. 
This  is  certainly  important,  if  true.  We  used 
to  be  told  that  war  was  essential  for  the  devel- 
opment of  the  highest  moral  qualities;  we  are 
now  assured  that  it  is  part  of  a  true  religious 
faith  as  well.  Surely,  in  this  sublime  conten- 
tion lack  of  humor  has  done  its  worst!  The 
establishment  of  peace  through  justice  and  of 
international  good  will  through  international 
friendship,  must  be  making  great  strides  when 
its  adversaries  are  willing  to  appear  in  so  ridic- 
ulous a  guise. 

A'clever  observer  of  his  kind  said  not  long  ago 
that  whenever  some  occupation  was  discovered 
making  for  the  peace  of  the  world  that  was  as 
profitable  as  is  the  preparation  for  war,  then  the 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  71 

age  of  militarism  would  be  over.  This  state- 
ment touches  upon  a  very  profound  and  far- 
reaching  truth  to  which  I  ventured  to  allude  in 
this  place  a  year  ago.  This  truth  is  one  that 
must  be  seriously  reckoned  with.  We  have  now 
reached  a  point  where,  unparalleled  enthusiasm 
having  been  aroused  for  a  rational  and  orderly 
development  of  civilization  through  the  co- 
operation of  the  various  nations  of  the  earth, 
it  remains  to  clinch  that  enthusiasm  and  to 
transform  it  into  established  policy  by  proving 
to  all  men  that  militarism  does  not  pay  and  that 
peace  is  profitable.  We  must  meet  the  money- 
changers at  the  doors  of  their  own  counting- 
houses.  Just  so  long  as  the  great  mass  of  man- 
kind believe  that  military  and  naval  rivalry 
between  civilized  nations  creates  and  protects 
trade,  develops  and  assures  commerce,  and  gives 
prestige  and  power  to  peoples  otherwise  weak, 
just  so  long  will  the  mass  of  mankind  be  unwill- 
ing to  compel  their  governments  to  recede  from 
militaristic  policies,  whatever  may  be  their  vocal 
professions  as  to  peace  and  arbitration  and  as 
to  good  will  and  friendship  between  men  of 
different  tongues  and  of  different  blood. 
The  fact  of  the  matter  is  that  these  widely 


72  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

held  beliefs  as  to  the  relation  between  arma- 
ments and  trade  are  wholly  fallacious,  and  rep- 
resent the  survival  of  a  state  of  opinion  and  a 
state  of  fact  which  have  been  superseded  for  at 
least  a  generation.  These  fallacious  beliefs  are 
now  the  point  in  the  wall  of  opposition  to  the 
establishment  of  peace  through  justice,  at  which 
sharp  and  concentrated  attack  should  be  di- 
rected. Overthrow  these  and  there  will  not  be 
much  opposition  left  which  is  not  essentially 
evil  in  its  intent. 

Fortunately,  by  reason  of  the  great  benefac- 
tion of  Mr.  Carnegie,  the  world  now  has  in  its 
possession  a  powerful  engine  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  precisely  this  end.  The  establishment 
of  the  Carnegie  Endowment  for  International 
Peace  marks  an  epoch,  in  that  it  furnishes  the 
organization  and  the  means  for  a  sustained  and 
systematic  effort  to  reach  and  to  convince  the 
public  opinion  of  the  world  by  scientific  argu- 
ment and  exposition.  Talk  about  the  evils  of 
war  there  has  been  in  plenty;  we  are  now  ready 
and  anxious  for  something  more  constructive. 

The  Trustees  of  the  Endowment  have  taken 
a  broad  and  statesmanlike  view  of  its  aims  and 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  73 

purposes.  While  they  do  not  overlook  the 
value  of  the  work  of  propaganda  and  intend 
to  aid  in  carrying  it  on,  they  believe  that  the 
time  has  come  when  the  resources  of  modern 
scientific  method  and  of  modern  scholarship 
should  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  problem 
of  international  relations.  They  believe  that 
the  leading  jurists  and  economists  of  the  world 
should  be  set  at  work  in  the  service  of 
humanity  to  ascertain  just  what  have  been  and 
are  the  legal  and  economic  incidents  of  war, 
and  just  what  are  the  legal  and  economic  ad- 
vantages to  follow  upon  the  organization  of 
the  world  into  a  single  group  of  friendly  and 
co-operating  nations  bound  together  by  the  tie 
of  a  judicial  system  resting  upon  the  moral 
consciousness  of  mankind,  from  whose  findings 
there  can  be  no  successful  appeal.  The  plans 
of  the  Trustees  have  been  formulated  with 
these  ends  in  view. 

It  has  been  determined  by  the  Trustees  of 
the  Carnegie  Endowment  to  organize  the  un- 
dertaking committed  to  their  charge  as  a  great 
institution  for  research  and  public  education 
and  to  carry  on  its  work  in  three  parts  or  divi- 
sions,— a  Division  of  International  Law,  a  Di- 


74  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

vision  of  Economics  and  History,  and  a  Division 
of  Intercourse  and  Education.  Otherwise  stated, 
these  three  Divisions  will  represent  the  juristic, 
the  economic,  and,  broadly  speaking,  the  edu- 
cational aspects  of  the  problem  before  the 
Trustees,  which  is  to  hasten  the  abolition  of 
international  war  by  the  erection  of  an  inter- 
national judicial  system  competent  to  hear  and 
to  determine  all  questions  of  difference  arising 
between  nations. 

The  Division  of  International  Law  will  be 
under  the  direction  of  Professor  James  Brown 
Scott,  whose  services  at  the  Department  of 
State,  at  the  second  Hague  Conference,  and  in 
connection  with  the  American  Society  and 
Journal  of  International  Law,  are  too  well 
known  to  need  specific  enumeration.  This 
Division  will  promote  the  development  of  inter- 
national law,  and  by  study,  by  conferences,  by 
aiding  negotiations,  and  by  publication,  it 
will  assist  in  bringing  about  such  a  progressive 
development  of  the  rules  of  international  law 
as  will  enable  them  to  meet  with  constantly 
growing  adequacy  the  needs  of  the  nations  of 
the  world  in  their  juristic  relations  toward  each 
other.  It  will  not  be  sufficient,  however,  to 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  75 

bring  the  principles  and  rules  of  international 
law  to  the  notice  of  the  people  of  various  na- 
tions; the  rights  and  duties  that  are  implied 
in  these  principles  and  rules,  and  that  follow 
from  them,  must  also  be  clearly  and  effectively 
taught.  Furthermore,  this  Division  of  the  En- 
dowment will  aim  constantly  to  inculcate  the 
belief  that  intercourse  between  nations  should 
be  based  upon  a  correct  and  definite  idea  of 
international  justice.  To  the  perfecting  and 
clarifying  of  the  fundamental  conception  of 
international  justice,  this  Division  will  assidu- 
ously devote  itself. 

All  this  study  and  activity  have  for  their 
object  to  hasten  the  day  when  the  principles 
and  rules  of  international  law  will  be  so  clearly 
apprehended  and  so  satisfactory  that  the  settle- 
ment of  international  differences  and  disputes 
in  accordance  with  their  terms  will  become  the 
unvarying  practice  of  civilized  nations. 

For  this  purpose  the  Endowment  will  asso- 
ciate with  Dr.  Scott  a  consultative  board  com- 
posed of  some  of  the  most  distinguished  inter- 
national lawyers  in  the  world.  The  point  of 
view  of  each  great  nation  will  be  represented 
in  their  councils,  and  the  results  to  be  arrived 


76  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

at  will  be  the  joint  work  of  jurists  of  every 
school  and  of  every  language.  It  is  not  too  much 
to  hope  that  by  the  influence  of  these  scholars 
the  international  law  of  the  future  will  prove 
to  be  without  the  division  between  the  law  of 
peace  and  the  law  of  war  which  is  now  charac- 
teristic of  it.  The  method  which  obtains  in 
the  domain  of  municipal  law  affords  a  model 
and  an  example  for  the  method  to  be  applied 
in  the  field  of  international  law.  We  need,  first, 
an  agreement  as  to  the  fundamental  principles 
which  should  regulate  the  rights  and  duties  of 
nations  in  their  mutual  intercourse,  which  prin- 
ciples would  then  form  the  substantive  law  of 
nations.  The  means  and  instrumentalities  pro- 
vided to  enforce  a  right  or  to  redress  a  wrong 
would  indicate  the  natural  and  normal  pro- 
cedure to  be  followed  in  international  discussion 
and  litigation.  It  would  then  appear  that  for 
the  maintenance  of  rights  and  for  the  redress 
of  wrongs  between  nations  there  are,  first,  the 
legal  remedies,  and,  secondly,  the  resort  to  vio- 
lence and  force.  In  this  way  the  rules  of  war 
would  cease  to  form  a  part  of  the  substantive 
law  of  nations;  they  would  be  classed  together 
with  the  peaceable  remedies  and  after  them  as 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  77 

one  of  the  possible  means  of  enforcing  rights 
and  redressing  wrongs.  The  text-books  of  in- 
ternational law  would  no  longer  put  war  on  an 
equality  with  peace,  but  would  relegate  it  to 
its  appropriately  subordinate  place  in  the  con- 
sideration of  questions  of  procedure. 

The  Hague  Conference  has  solemnly  declared 
that  the  maintenance  of  peace  is  the  supreme 
duty  of  nations.  For  the  execution  of  this  su- 
preme duty  adequate  means  must  be  provided. 
If  they  are  at  hand  they  should  be  strengthened; 
if  they  are  not  at  hand  they  must  be  brought 
into  existence.  A  study  of  the  struggle  in  the 
history  of  Europe  between  self-redress  and  the 
judicial  settlement  of  private  disputes,  and  of 
the  steps  by  which  private  warfare  was  abolished 
and  civil  actions  were  made  determinable  by 
courts  of  law,  will  help  to  convince  the  nations 
of  the  world  that  the  very  measures  which  they 
have  taken  within  their  several  borders  to  do 
away  with  self-redress  and  to  establish  domestic 
peace  and  order,  are  precisely  those  which  will 
establish  order  and  justice  and  assure  peace 
between  the  nations  themselves.  This  whole 
process  is  one  of  legal  evolution. 

The  second  Division  of  the  work  of  the  Car- 


78  TEE  EDUCATION  OF 

negie  Endowment  will  be  the  Division  of  Eco- 
nomics and  History.  It  will  be  under  the  direc- 
tion of  Professor  John  Bates  Clark,  of  Columbia 
University,  whose  leading  place  among  Eng- 
lish-speaking economists  is  gladly  recognized 
everywhere.  The  work  of  this  Division,  like 
that  of  the  Division  of  International  Law,  will 
be  scientific  and  scholarly  in  character,  in  or- 
ganization, and  in  method.  Like  the  Division 
of  International  Law,  the  Division  of  Econom- 
ics and  History  will  aim  at  the  education  of 
public  opinion  and  at  the  formulation  of  con- 
clusions that  may  serve  for  the  guidance  of 
governmental  policy.  With  Professor  Clark 
will  be  associated  a  score  of  the  world's  leading 
economists.  England,  Germany,  France,  Italy, 
Austria,  Hungary,  Switzerland,  Holland,  Den- 
mark, Japan,  the  Argentine  Republic,  and  other 
nations  will  have  a  voice  and  a  part  in  formu- 
lating the  problems  to  whose  solution  this  Divi- 
sion will  address  itself,  and  in  working  out  the 
solutions  of  those  problems.  The  results  ar- 
rived at  in  this  case,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Divi- 
sion of  International  Law,  will  not  be  those  im- 
posed upon  the  judgment  of  one  people  by  the 
scholars  and  economists  of  another,  but  they 


TEE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  79 

will  be  those  that  are  reached  by  co-operation 
between  economists  of  a  dozen  nations. 

It  will  be  the  business  of  this  Division  of  the 
work  of  the  Endowment  to  study  the  economic 
causes  and  effects  of  war;  the  effect  upon  the 
public  opinion  of  nations  and  upon  international 
good  will,  of  retaliatory,  discriminatory,  and 
preferential  tariffs;  the  economic  aspects  of  the 
present  huge  expenditures  for  military  purposes; 
and  the  relation  between  military  expenditures 
and  international  well-being  and  the  world-wide 
program  for  social  improvement  and  reform 
which  is  held  in  waiting  through  lack  of  means 
for  its  execution. 

The  highest  expectations  may  confidently  be 
entertained  as  to  the  practical  results  to  follow 
from  the  successful  prosecution  of  economic 
studies  such  as  these.  Mankind  has  never  yet 
learned  to  appreciate  the  dislocation  which  war 
necessarily  produces  in  the  economic  processes 
of  production,  distribution,  exchange,  and  con- 
sumption all  over  the  world.  A  war  between 
two  nations  is  not  confined  in  its  effects  to  the 
combatants.  The  interests  of  neutral  powers 
are  involved  in  some  degree.  Articles  for  which 
there  is  no  market  in  time  of  peace  are  called 


8o  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

for  in  large  amounts  in  time  of  war;  the  proc- 
esses of  production  are  diverted  from  their  nor- 
mal channels  or  are  artificially  stimulated  in 
abnormal  ways;  exchange  is  alternately  dimin- 
ished and  accelerated;  the  markets  of  the  world 
are  disarranged;  and  in  every  direction  are  to 
be  found  evidences  of  war's  ravages  and  evil 
consequences.  Mankind  must  be  taught  to 
look  upon  war  as  a  pathological  phenomenon; 
to  seek  in  the  economic  and  social  life  of  men 
and  nations  for  its  most  active  causes;  and  to 
look  farther  and  deeper  in  that  same  economic 
and  social  life  for  modes  of  preventing  war  and 
for  allowing  the  economic  activities  of  man- 
kind to  go  forward  unhindered  and  unhampered 
in  their  mighty  task  of  laying  the  basis  for  an 
increasingly  higher  and  nobler  civilization. 

The  work  of  this  Division  of  the  Endowment 
may  well  result,  within  a  measurable  period,  in 
broadening  the  study  and  the  teaching  of  po- 
litical economy  everywhere.  Moreover,  it  will 
help  to  bring  about  a  new  conception  of  history, 
and  to  establish  new  tests  of  effectiveness  in 
the  teaching  of  it.  We  shall  gain  from  these 
studies  a  new  standard  in  the  measurement  of 
human  values,  and  the  children  of  the  genera- 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  81 

tions  that  are  to  come  will  have  an  opportunity 
to  learn  more  fully  than  has  yet  been  possible 
of  the  high  significance  of  the  scientific  and  phil- 
osophic development  of  mankind,  of  his  artistic 
and  literary  achievements,  of  his  moral  and  so- 
cial advances,  of  his  industrial  and  commercial 
undertakings;  in  fact,  of  all  those  things  which 
we  justly  think  of  as  entering  into  a  true  con- 
ception of  civilization. 

In  these  two  Divisions — those  of  International 
Law  and  of  Economics  and  History — the  En- 
dowment will,  under  the  leadership  and  guid- 
ance of  trained  scholars  of  the  first  rank,  seek 
to  make  constant  and  influential  contributions 
to  human  knowledge  with  a  view  to  so  instruct- 
ing public  opinion  as  to  hasten  the  day  when 
judicial  process  will  everywhere  be  substituted 
for  force  in  the  settlement  of  international  dif- 
ferences and  misunderstandings. 

There  remains  a  third  and  important  division 
of  the  work  of  the  Endowment — the  Division 
of  Intercourse  and  Education — the  director  for 
which  has  not  yet  been  announced.  It  will  be 
the  function  of  this  Division  to  supplement  the 
work  of  the  two  Divisions,  which  may  be  called, 
perhaps,  the  scientific  ones,  by  carrying  forward 


8a  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

vigorously,  and  in  co-operation  with  existing 
agencies,  the  educational  work  of  propaganda, 
of  international  hospitality,  and  of  promoting 
international  friendship.  Among  the  tasks  of 
this  Division  will  be  to  diffuse  information  and 
to  educate  public  opinion  regarding  the  causes, 
nature,  and  effects  of  war,  and  the  means  for 
its  prevention  and  avoidance;  to  establish  a 
better  understanding  of  international  rights  and 
duties  and  a  more  perfect  sense  of  international 
justice  among  the  inhabitants  of  civilized  na- 
tions; to  cultivate  friendly  feelings  between  the 
inhabitants  of  different  countries,  and  to  in- 
crease the  knowledge  and  understanding  of  each 
other  of  the  several  nations;  to  promote  a  gen- 
eral acceptance  of  peaceable  methods  in  the 
settlement  of  international  disputes;  and  to 
maintain,  promote,  and  assist  such  establish- 
ments, organizations,  associations,  and  agencies 
as  shall  be  deemed  necessary  or  useful  in  the 
accomplishment  of  the  purposes  for  which  the 
Endowment  exists.  In  other  words,  this  Di- 
vision will  make  practical  application  of  the 
teachings  and  findings  of  the  Divisions  of  Inter- 
national Law  and  of  Economics  and  History. 
It  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  the  men  at 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  83 

the  head  of  these  three  important  Divisions  of 
the  work  of  the  Endowment,  with  their  imme- 
diate associates  and  colleagues  in  this  and  other 
countries,  will  speedily  come  to  form  a  veri- 
table Faculty  of  Peace,  and  that  the  world  will 
look  to  them  more  and  more  for  instruction 
and  for  inspiration  alike.  No  such  broad  and 
philosophic  conception  of  international  relations 
has  ever  before  been  put  forward  as  that  which 
the  Trustees  of  the  Endowment  have  formulated 
and  made  their  own.  The  conception  itself  and 
the  admirable  plans  made  for  its  development 
and  application  open  a  new  era  in  the  history 
of  the  world. 

To  such  great  and  nobly  conceived  tasks  as 
these  the  Trustees  of  the  Carnegie  Endowment 
for  International  Peace  have  set  their  hands. 
Every  true  lover  of  his  kind  will  wish  them 
success  in  their  stupendous  undertaking,  and 
will  offer  them  earnest  and  hearty  support 
toward  its  accomplishment. 

The  organization  of  an  international  judicial 
system  goes  steadily  on.  The  auspicious  settle- 
ment of  the  differences  between  Great  Britain 
and  the  United  States  in  regard  to  the  New- 


84  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

foundland  Fisheries,  by  their  submission  to  the 
International  Court  of  Arbitration  at  The 
Hague,  was  at  once  a  long  step  forward  in 
international  practice  and  an  example  which 
has  not  been  without  its  effect  upon  the  public 
opinion  of  other  nations.  It  must  not  be  for- 
gotten that  an  International  Court  of  Prize  was 
created  by  the  second  Hague  Conference,  and 
that  the  same  body,  composed  of  accredited 
representatives  from  forty-four  different  na- 
tions, recommended  the  establishment  of  an 
International  Court  of  Arbitral  Justice.  So 
soon  as  these  two  Courts  shall  be  put  into 
operation  at  The  Hague  a  permanent  inter- 
national judiciary  will  have  been  created, — one 
capable  of  hearing  and  deciding  any  and  every 
controversy  of  a  justiciable  character  which  may 
arise  between  nations  either  in  time  of  peace 
or  because  of  the  existence  of  a  state  of  war. 

The  convention  for  the  establishment  of  the 
International  Court  of  Prize  has  been  approved 
by  thirty-four  nations.  Despite  this  fact,  the 
Court  has  not  yet  been  instituted.  Various 
objections  have  been  made  to  its  institution  as 
planned,  and  to  overcome  these  objections  no 
little  time,  patience,  and  diplomatic  skill  have 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  85 

been  necessary.  It  is  common  knowledge  that 
Great  Britain  objected  to  that  article  of  the 
convention  establishing  the  International  Court 
of  Prize  which  gave  to  the  Court  the  power  to 
determine,  as  well  as  to  administer,  the  law 
where  the  principle  of  law  applicable  to  the  facts 
as  found  had  not  yet  been  formulated  by  inter- 
national practice  or  imposed  upon  the  Court 
by  convention.  Great  Britain  did  not  wish  to 
invest  the  International  Court  of  Prize  with  law- 
making  functions,  and  therefore  postponed  its 
acceptance  of  the  convention  until  an  agree- 
ment had  been  had  upon  the  principles  of  law 
which  the  tribunal  was  to  administer.  Upon 
the  invitation  of  the  Government  of  Great 
Britain,  representatives  of  the  leading  naval 
powers  assembled  in  London  from  December 
4,  1908,  to  February  26,  1909,  and  agreed  upon 
the  so-called  Declaration  of  London,  the  pur- 
pose of  which  is  to  furnish  the  proposed  tri- 
bunal with  the  law  which  as  the  International 
Court  of  Prize  it  is  to  administer.  In  this  way 
the  objection  of  Great  Britain  has  been  met. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  United  States  objected 
to  those  provisions  of  this  same  convention 
which  gave  to  the  proposed  tribunal  the  attri- 


86  TEE  EDUCATION  OF 

butes  of  a  court  of  appeal,  and  under  which  a 
judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  might  be  subject  to  review  at  its  hands. 
This  objection,  which  must  be  considered  in 
large  part  sentimental,  drew  its  force  from  the 
fact  that  under  the  Constitution  there  is  but 
one  Supreme  Court,  and  that  an  appeal  from 
its  findings  to  an  International  Court  at  The 
Hague  would  seem  to  take  away  some  of  the 
powers  which  the  Supreme  Court  possesses  and 
of  which  Americans  are  so  justly  proud.  This 
objection  is,  as  has  been  said,  in  large  measure 
sentimental,  because  the  International  Court 
of  Prize  is  to  be,  not  a  national,  but  an  interna- 
tional institution,  and  the  Constitution  applies, 
of  course,  to  a  court  within  the  United  States 
and  not  to  one  without  the  country.  Neverthe- 
less, an  alternative  form  of  procedure  has  been 
proposed,  which  meets  the  objections  offered 
on  behalf  of  the  United  States  and  which,  em- 
bodied in  the  form  of  an  additional  protocol,  has 
been  approved  by  the  signatories  of  the  original 
Convention.  By  the  terms  of  this  additional 
protocol,  any  nation  which  feels  itself  precluded 
from  following,  for  constitutional  reasons,  the 
procedure  originally  proposed  for  the  Interna- 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  87 

tional  Court  of  Prize,  is  placed  in  a  position 
where  recourse  to  that  Court  can  only  be  exer- 
cised against  it  in  the  form  of  an  action  in  dam- 
ages for  the  injury  caused  by  an  alleged  illegal 
capture. 

On  February  15,  1911,  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States  approved  both  the  original  Con- 
vention as  to  the  International  Court  of  Prize 
and  the  additional  protocol.  Ratifications  of 
both  instruments  by  the  various  signatories  will 
doubtless  be  deposited  at  The  Hague  during  the 
present  year,  and  the  International  Court  of 
Prize  will  then  become  an  accomplished  fact. 

Great  as  are  the  advantages  of  an  Inter- 
national Court  of  Prize,  the  fact  must  not  be 
overlooked  that  the  very  existence  of  such  an 
institution  presupposes  war;  for  its  purpose  is 
to  decide  controversies  arising  because  of  alleged 
illegal  captures  in  time  of  war.  The  Interna- 
tional Court  of  Arbitral  Justice,  on  the  other 
hand,  has  for  its  purpose  the  settlement  of  con- 
troversies and  differences  which  arise  in  time 
of  peace,  and  which,  when  settled  and  deter- 
mined, may  avert  hostility  and  war.  It  will  be 
remembered  that  at  the  second  Hague  Confer- 
ence the  proposal  of  the  United  States  in  regard 


88  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

to  the  establishment  of  this  Court  was  accepted 
in  principle,  and  that  a  draft  convention  was 
adopted  regulating  its  organization,  jurisdiction, 
and  procedure;  but  that  the  definitive  con- 
stitution of  the  Court  was  not  agreed  upon 
because  the  Conference  failed  to  hit  upon  a 
method  of  selecting  the  judges  that  was  ac- 
ceptable to  all  of  the  nations  represented. 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  has 
been  at  work,  through  appropriate  diplomatic 
channels,  upon  the  problem  of  bringing  about 
the  establishment  of  this  Court,  and  it  is  with 
no  small  satisfaction  that  I  am  enabled  to  say 
that  the  progress  which  is  making  in  the  con- 
sideration of  this  matter  indicates  that  it  will 
be  brought  to  a  favorable  conclusion  in  the  near 
future.  At  this  Conference  one  year  ago,  the 
Secretary  of  State  authorized  the  announcement 
that  he  had  reason  to  believe  that  the  Inter- 
national Court  of  Arbitral  Justice  would  be 
instituted  before  the  time  set  for  the  meeting 
of  the  third  Hague  Conference.  It  is  now  pos- 
sible to  say,  again  with  the  knowledge  and  ap- 
proval of  the  Secretary  of  State,  that  the  prog- 
ress made  during  the  past  year  has  been  so 
marked  that  in  all  likelihood  such  a  Court, 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  89 

created  by  general  agreement,  will  be  erected 
at  The  Hague  even  earlier  than  seemed  prob- 
able a  year  ago. 

Both  war  and  peace,  therefore,  are  soon  to 
have  their  courts — the  International  Court  of 
Prize  and  the  International  Court  of  Arbitral 
Justice.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that 
one  of  the  results  of  the  latter  will  very  soon  be 
to  make  the  former  a  monument  to  an  order  of 
things  that  is  past. 

The  nations  are  still  struggling  with  the  prob- 
lem of  inflated  armaments,  and  no  sensible  prog- 
ress has  been  made  toward  gaining  relief  from 
their  burdens.  Those  who  believe,  with  this 
Conference,  in  the  efficacy  of  international 
courts  for  the  settlement  of  international  dif- 
ferences, are  inclined  to  feel  that  these  great 
armaments  may  well  be  left  to  tumble  over, 
one  of  these  days,  of  their  own  unnecessary 
weight.  When,  as  we  have  recently  seen,  the 
successful  and  popular  battleship  of  a  few 
years  ago  is  only  useful  as  a  target  for  the 
marksmen  of  to-day,  the  future  of  excessive 
armaments  may  be  viewed  with  comparative 
serenity. 


90  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

The  widespread  persistence  of  the  mistaken 
notion  that  in  some  way  big  navies  protect  and 
develop  commerce  is  responsible  for  much  of 
the  present  national  loss  and  waste.  The  last 
blow  would  be  dealt  to  this  notion  if  the  other 
great  powers  would  consent  to  join  the  United 
States  in  writing  into  international  law  the  prin- 
ciple that  private  property  at  sea  shall  be  free 
of  capture  and  seizure  in  time  of  war.  Prey- 
ing upon  private  property,  and  its  confiscation, 
have  long  been  forbidden  in  wars  conducted  on 
land;  why  should  they  be  permitted  longer  to 
exist  when  war  is  carried  on  at  sea?  Who  is 
to  gain  by  the  continuance  of  this  now  barbar- 
ous practice? 

It  is  a  sign  of  great  promise  that  at  the  last 
regular  meeting  of  the  Council  of  the  London 
Chamber  of  Commerce  no  less  a  person  than 
Lord  Avebury  moved  "that,  in  the  opinion  of 
this  Chamber,  private  property  at  sea  should 
be  declared  free  of  capture  and  seizure."  The 
motion  was  carefully  discussed  and  then  adopted 
by  a  unanimous  vote.  The  conflict  here  is  be- 
tween admiralties  and  the  commercial  and  finan- 
cial forces  of  the  nations.  The  admiralties  of 
the  world  must  be  compelled  to  give  way  on  this 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  91 

point — where  they  have  not  already  done  so — 
to  the  reasonable  demands  of  those  whose  prop- 
erty is  subjected  to  loss  and  damage  by  per- 
sistence in  the  present  unhappy  and  uncivilized 
policy,  to  say  nothing  of  the  demands  made  by 
those  who  take  still  higher  moral  and  public 
grounds.  As  Mr.  Hirst,  Editor  of  the  London 
Economist^  so  forcibly  wrote  a  short  time  since 
"This  policy  of  commerce  destruction  is  really 
moribund  and  obsolete.  If  practised  between 
two  great  commercial  nations  it  would  raise 
such  an  outcry  and  involve  such  injustices  that 
I  feel  sure  it  would  be  dropped  by  mutual  con- 
sent at  an  early  stage  of  hostilities.  Neverthe- 
less, the  maintenance  of  the  right  is  highly  mis- 
chievous, because  it  is  a  prime  incentive  to 
armaments  in  time  of  peace  and  a  prime  cause 
of  oppressive  taxation.  Statesmen  and  journal- 
ists found  most  of  their  arguments  for  increased 
expenditure  on  armaments  upon  the  necessity 
for  protecting  commerce.  To  a  greater  or  less 
extent  they  know  that  their  plea  is  fraudulent, 
but  it  serves  the  purpose." 

When  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  refused, 
fourteen  years  ago,  to  ratify  the  proposed  arbi- 


92  THE  EDUCATION  OF 

tration  treaty  with  England  negotiated  by  Sec- 
retary Olney  and  Sir  Julian  Pauncefote,  and 
transmitted  with  the  earnest  approval  of  Presi- 
dent Cleveland,  there  was  deep  disappointment. 
At  that  time  forty-three  Senators  voted  for 
ratification  and  twenty-six  against.  The  treaty, 
therefore,  failed  to  receive  the  two-thirds  ma- 
jority required  by  the  Constitution.  A  change 
of  three  votes  from  the  negative  to  the  affirma- 
tive side  of  the  question  would  have  ratified  a 
treaty,  the  first  article  of  which  provided  for 
the  submission  to  arbitration  of  all  questions 
in  difference  between  the  high  contracting  par- 
ties which  they  might  fail  to  adjust  by  diplo- 
matic negotiation.  The  disappointment  at  the 
rejection  of  the  Olney-Pauncefote  treaty  was  as 
pronounced  in  Great  Britain  as  it  was  in  the 
United  States.  The  London  Spectator  thought 
that  the  rejection  of  the  treaty  was  due  to  the 
element  of  our  population  that  likes  a  fight  and 
a  flourish,  that  hates  moderation  and  sobriety 
and  prudence,  and  that  cannot  tolerate  the  no- 
tion of  the  fate  of  the  country  being  in  the  hands 
of  clergymen  and  professors,  of  lawyers  and  phi- 
lanthropists. However  that  may  be,  the  treaty 
was  rejected,  and  not  until  the  present  time 


THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE  93 

has  any  successful  attempt  been  made  to  re- 
new the  undertaking  then  interrupted.  Presi- 
dent Taft's  direct,  unequivocal,  and  emphatic 
declaration  as  to  the  scope  of  international  arbi- 
tration, and  in  particular  as  to  the  wisdom  of 
an  international  arbitration  treaty  with  Great 
Britain,  has  aroused  the  greatest  enthusiasm  on 
both  sides  of  the  Atlantic.  The  reception  of  his 
words  in  Great  Britain  has  been,  so  far  as  one 
can  judge,  quite  unexampled.  Every  element 
of  the  population  and  the  leaders  of  all  shades 
of  political  opinion  have  joined  together  in  an 
enthusiastic  reception  of  the  President's  splen- 
did declaration.  It  is  understood  that  an  arbi- 
tration treaty  with  Great  Britain,  making  no  res- 
ervations as  to  the  subjects  of  difference  which 
are  to  be  submitted  for  judicial  determination 
in  accordance  with  its  terms,  is  soon  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  Senate  for  ratification.  It  is  also 
understood  that  the  preliminary  negotiations 
have  been  conducted  with  such  discretion  and 
tact,  and  with  such  full  knowledge  on  the  part 
of  the  Senate,  that  prompt  and  substantially 
unanimous  ratification  of  such  a  treaty  is  as- 
sured. 

Surely  then,  some  American  poet  should  feel 


94  THE  WORLD  FOR  PEACE 

the  inspiration  to  provide  our  Republic  with  a 
Peace  Hymn  that  would  stir  and  move  and  in- 
spire as  did  Julia  Ward  Howe's  fine  "  Battle 
Hymn  of  the  Republic  "  at  the  outbreak  of  the 
terrible  struggle  between  the  States.  Nations, 
like  individuals,  are  powerfully  moved  by  ex- 
ample and  by  precedent.  A  treaty  of  the  kind 
proposed  between  two  powers  of  the  first  class 
will  not  long  stand  alone.  Its  beneficent  in- 
fluence will  call  other  similar  treaties  into  being, 
and  the  peaceful  organization  of  the  world 
through  judicial  process  will  have  taken  an- 
other long  stride  forward.  Every  such  stride 
forward  is  a  new  triumph  for  reasonableness. 


V 

THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 


Opening  Address  as  Chairman  of  the  Lake  Mohonk  Con- 
ference on  International  Arbitration,  May  15,  1912 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

At  the  time  of  our  gathering  one  year  ago  it 
was  natural  and  almost  inevitable  that  a  note 
of  congratulation  and  happy  augury  should  be 
sounded.  All  the  signs  both  at  home  and  abroad 
seemed  propitious,  and  those  who  had  labored 
so  long  and  so  earnestly  to  promote  the  cause 
of  international  justice  and  international  peace 
could  reasonably  feel  that  substantial  progress 
toward  the  goal  of  their  hopes  had  been  made. 
To-day  we  meet  in  a  somewhat  different  at- 
mosphere. Many  of  us  find  ourselves  troubled 
by  doubts  and  harassed  by  disappointment. 
Within  sixty  days  after  the  Conference  of  1911 
had  risen,  two  of  the  greatest,  most  powerful, 
and  most  enlightened  nations  known  to  history 
were  widely  believed  to  be  on  the  verge  of  armed 
conflict  about  something  which  nobody  was  able 
to  understand  or  to  explain.  The  newspaper 
press  of  the  world  was  filled  with  the  most  terri- 
fying alarms.  Charges  and  countercharges,  sus- 

97 


98  THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

picions  and  countersuspicions,  were  heralded  all 
round  the  globe  and  the  hearts  of  the  lovers  of 
peace  with  justice  sank  within  them.  All  at 
once  modern  civilization  seemed  bankrupt,  and 
the  western  world  suddenly  appeared  as  if  ap- 
proaching a  cataclysm.  Nevertheless,  the  oft- 
predicted  contest  did  not  take  place.  Strong, 
brave,  enlightened  men  were  at  the  helm  of 
state  and  they  conducted  their  grave  business 
with  so  much  discretion,  with  so  much  tact,  and 
with  so  much  genuine  statesmanship  that  the 
threatened  danger  was  averted.  Let  us  sin- 
cerely hope  that  it  was  averted  forever. 

It  would  be  a  pleasant  task  to  tell  in  this 
company,  if  it  were  permissible,  the  detailed 
story  of  last  summer's  fateful  work  for  war,  and 
of  what  may  well  prove  to  have  been  last  sum- 
mer's epoch-making  work  for  peace. 

It  is  easy  to  run  with  the  crowd  and  to  follow 
the  example  of  that  French  revolutionary  who, 
hearing  the  noise  and  the  roar  of  the  street,  cried 
out  "There  go  the  people;  I  must  follow  them, 
for  I  am  their  leader."  But  to  stand  with 
patience  and  self-control  in  a  post  of  high  re- 
sponsibility when  a  strong  current  of  public 
opinion  goes  sweeping  by,  careless  of  conse- 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND  99 

quences  and  unrestrained  in  its  expression  of 
feeling,  is  the  mark  of  a  real  man.  This  Con- 
ference should  hold  in  everlasting  honor  the 
German  Emperor  and  the  responsible  statesmen 
of  France,  Germany,  and  Great  Britain,  who 
solved  the  difficulties  and  allayed  the  dangers 
of  the  summer  of  1911  without  permitting 
the  precipitation  of  a  colossal  and  devastating 
war.  The  Nobel  Prize  might  appropriately  be 
awarded  to  some  one  of  those  who  then  kept 
the  doors  of  the  Temple  of  Janus  shut  when 
mighty  pressure  was  exerted  to  force  them 
open. 

The  world  is  not  likely  to  know  until  many 
years  have  passed  and  until  the  chief  partici- 
pants in  the  international  business  of  last  sum- 
mer are  dead  and  gone,  just  how  grave  the  cri- 
sis was,  just  how  trivial  and  how  sordid  were 
the  causes  that  led  to  that  crisis,  and  just  how 
bravely  and  how  honorably  that  crisis  was  met 
and  averted  by  responsible  statesmen. 

The  consideration  by  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States  of  the  projected  treaties  of  general  arbi- 
tration with  Great  Britain  and  with  France 
came  to  a  rather  lame. and  impotent  conclusion. 
The  debate,  fortunately  conducted  in  open  ses- 


ioo          THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

sion,  revealed  the  fact  that  not  all  the  members 
of  the  Senate  have  any  real  grasp  of  our  inter- 
national relations  or  any  genuine  appreciation  of 
our  international  responsibilities.  It  is  fair  to 
say  that  a  very  large  majority  of  the  Senate 
approached  the  consideration  of  these  treaties 
with  entire  good  will  and  with  favorable  mind. 
Some  Senators  appeared,  however,  to  be  so  little 
accustomed  to  the  study  of  international  busi- 
ness and  to  reflecting  upon  the  relation  of  treat- 
ies like  these  to  the  movement  of  the  best  opin- 
ion throughout  the  world,  that  they  were  easily 
led  to  give  weight  to  obstacles  and  difficulties 
that  were  either  irrelevant  or  wholly  unimpor- 
tant. As  was  to  be  expected,  while  the  treaties 
were  under  discussion  the  boisterous  elements 
of  our  population,  those  that  love  to  talk  of  war 
and  to  threaten  it  as  well  as  to  decry  peace  and 
to  poke  fun  at  it,  were  heard  from  under  not 
incompetent  leadership. 

A  yet  more  unhappy  and  discouraging  event 
was  the  breaking  out  of  armed  hostilities  be- 
tween Italy  and  Turkey,  two  powers  signatory 
to  The  Hague  Conventions  of  1899,  without  any 
recourse  being  had  to  the  provisions  of  those 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND          101 

Conventions  which  would,  it  may  with  certainty 
be  said,  have  made  a  subsequent  resort  to  arms 
either  impossible  or  ridiculous. 

These  events  of  the  past  year  serve  to  illus- 
trate once  more  the  real  difficulties  which  con- 
front us,  and  to  set  the  problem  of  obtaining 
peace  through  justice  in  a  yet  clearer  light.  We 
must  learn  to  bring  to  the  consideration  of 
public  business  in  its  international  aspects  what 
I  may  call  the  international  mind,  and  the  in- 
ternational mind  is  still  rarely  to  be  found  in 
high  places.  That  the  international  mind  is 
not  inconsistent  with  sincere  and  devoted  pa- 
triotism is  clearly  shown  by  the  history  of  the 
great  Liberal  statesmen  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury who  had  to  deal  with  the  making  of  Europe 
as  we  know  it.  If  Lord  Palmerston  had  the 
international  mind  not  at  all,  surely  Mr.  Glad- 
stone had  it  in  high  degree.  The  late  Marquis 
of  Salisbury,  whom  no  one  ever  accused  of  lack- 
ing devotion  to  national  policies  and  purposes, 
had  it  also,  although  a  Tory  of  the  Tories. 
Cavour  certainly  had  it,  as  did  Thiers.  Lord 
Morley  has  it,  and  so  has  his  colleague  Lord 
Haldane.  The  late  Senator  Hoar  had  it  when 


102          THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

on  a  somewhat  important  occasion  he  expressed 
the  hope  that  he  should  never  so  act  as  to 
place  his  country's  interests  above  his  country's 
honor.  It  was  the  possession  of  this  interna- 
tional mind  that  gave  to  the  brilliant  adminis- 
trations of  Secretary  Hay  and  Secretary  Root 
their  distinction  and  their  success.  The  lack  of 
it  has  marked  other  administrations  of  foreign 
affairs,  both  in  the  United  States  and  in  Euro- 
pean countries,  either  with  failure  or  with  con- 
tinuing and  strident  friction. 

What  is  this  international  mind,  and  how  are 
we  to  seek  for  it  and  to  gain  it  as  a  possession 
of  our  own  and  of  our  country?  The  interna- 
tional mind  is  nothing  else  than  that  habit  of 
thinking  of  foreign  relations  and  business,  and 
that  habit  of  dealing  with  them,  which  regard 
the  several  nations  of  the  civilized  world  as 
friendly  and  co-operating  equals  in  aiding  the 
progress  of  civilization,  in  developing  commerce 
and  industry,  and  in  spreading  enlightenment 
and  culture  throughout  the  world.  It  is  as 
inconsistent  with  the  international  mind  to 
attempt  to  steal  some  other  nation's  territory 
as  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  principles 
of  ordinary  morality  to  attempt  to  steal  some 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND          103 

other  individual's  purse.  Magnitude  does  not 
justify  us  in  dispensing  with  morals. 

When  Secretary  Hay  said  that  American  di- 
plomacy had  but  two  controlling  maxims,  the 
golden  rule  and  the  open  door,  he  spoke  with 
an  international  mind.  The  policy  of  swagger, 
that  of  swinging  sticks  either  big  or  little,  and 
that  of  threatening  to  double  or  treble  the  mili- 
tary armaments  and  preparations  of  some  other 
nation,  are  not  compatible  with  the  possession 
of  an  international  mind.  We  are  still  a  long 
way  from  the  millennium,  no  doubt,  and  the 
lion  and  the  lamb  are  not  yet  likely  to  lie  down 
side  by  side  with  entire  restraint  of  appetite  on 
the  part  of  the  lion  or  with  entire  assurance  on 
the  part  of  the  lamb.  Nevertheless,  we  might 
as  well  be  making  progress,  or  trying  to  make 
it,  and  not  allow  ourselves  to  sit  forever  help- 
less under  the  blighting  domination  of  the  brute 
instincts  of  mankind,  with  all  their  unscrupu- 
lousness,  their  fierce  cruelty  and  their  passion- 
ate clamor. 

In  striving  to  gain  the  international  mind,  it 
is  necessary  first  of  all  to  learn  to  measure  other 
peoples  and  other  civilizations  than  ours  from 
their  own  point  of  view  and  by  their  own  stand- 


104          THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

ards  rather  than  by  our  own.  Human  knowl- 
edge has  not  yet  been  able  to  master  and  to 
explain  the  meaning  of  the  profound  differences 
of  race  or  those  extraordinary  traits  which, 
when  grouped  together,  appear  to  constitute 
national  character.  What  we  do  know  is  that 
there  is  plainly  place  in  the  world  for  numerous 
races,  for  many  nationalities,  and,  therefore,  for 
different  points  of  view  and  for  different  an- 
gles of  reflection.  The  really  vital  question  is 
whether  the  time  has  yet  come,  and  if  not  what 
can  we  do  to  hasten  its  coming,  when  races  and 
nationalities  are  able  to  cease  preying  upon  and 
oppressing  one  another,  and  to  live  together  as 
fellow-sharers  in  a  world's  civilization  ?  In  other 
words,  the  vital  question  is  how  far  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  morality  that  as  individuals 
we  so  ardently  profess,  have  really  taken  hold 
of  us  in  our  corporate  capacity.  There  are  still 
current,  and  apparently  popular,  many  phrases 
and  political  cries  which  indicate  that  we  have 
no  very  profound  faith  in  the  dominance  of 
moral  principles,  and  no  very  clear  ethical  con- 
viction as  to  our  own  national  duty.  Here  in 
the  United  States  it  is  the  easiest  thing  possi- 
ble for  some  public  man  or  some  newspaper  to 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND          105 

arouse  suspicion  and  ill-feeling  against  Japan, 
against  Mexico,  against  England,  or  against 
Germany  by  inventing  a  few  facts  and  then 
adequately  emphasizing  them.  In  not  a  few 
of  the  unpleasant  international  discussions  of 
the  past  few  years,  the  people  of  the  United 
States  have  been  the  chief  offenders.  We  are 
given  to  looking  with  far  too  much  leniency 
upon  a  braggadocio  and  a  bravado  which  ape 
true  courage  and  genuine  patriotism,  as  well  as 
upon  those  wearisome  platitudes  which  are  a 
convenient  refuge  for  those  who  refuse  to  learn 
to  think. 

It  is  astonishing  how  even  men  of  the  highest 
intelligence  and  the  largest  responsibility  will 
be  swept  off  their  feet  in  regard  to  international 
matters  at  some  moment  of  strong  national  feel- 
ing, or  on  the  occasion  of  some  incident  which 
appeals  powerfully  to  the  sentiments  or  to  the 
passions  of  the  people.  At  the  very  moment 
when  the  nation  most  needs  the  guidance  of  its 
sober-minded  leaders  of  opinion,  that  guidance 
is  likely  to  be  found  wanting. 

Mr.  Charles  Francis  Adams  in  a  paper  on  the 
Trent  Affair  which  he  read  before  the  Massa- 
chusetts Historical  Society  in  November  last, 


106          THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

has  given  a  very  illuminating  example  of  hap- 
penings of  this  kind.  In  that  paper  Mr.  Adams 
has  made  both  a  valuable  addition  to  our  his- 
torical knowledge,  and  also  an  acute  and  pene- 
trating study  of  the  psychology  of  international 
politics.  He  points  out  that  probably  at  no 
time  in  the  earlier  history  of  the  United  States 
had  the  American  people  been  so  completely 
carried  away  by  feeling,  losing  for  the  moment 
possession  of  their  senses,  as  during  the  weeks 
which  immediately  followed  the  seizure  of 
Mason  and  Slidell.  Not  only  were  the  people 
swept  off  their  feet,  but  men  of  light  and  lead- 
ing, jurists,  constitutional  lawyers,  and  men  of 
state  joined  in  a  violent  and  passionate  cry 
which  time  and  reflection  have  shown  to  be 
absolutely  without  justification.  The  situation 
in  England  was  quite  as  serious.  John  Bright 
in  writing  at  the  time  to  Charles  Sumner  on 
this  subject,  spoke  of  the  sensation  which  had 
been  caused  in  Great  Britain  by  taking  the 
Southern  commissioners  from  an  English  ship, 
and  added  that  "the  ignorant  and  passionate 
and  'Rule  Britannia'  class  are  angry  and  inso- 
lent as  usual."  One  who  wishes  to  know  how 
difficult  it  is  to  acquire  the  international  mind 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND          107 

and  to  sustain  it  in  the  presence  of  a  great  wave 
of  national  feeling,  has  only  to  read  this  im- 
portant paper  by  Mr.  Adams.  He  will  then  see 
how  true  it  is,  as  Chancellor  von  Bethmann- 
Hollweg  said  to  the  Reichstag  a  few  days 
ago,  that  wars  are  not  planned  and  brought 
about  in  these  days  by  governments,  but 
noisy  and  fanatical  minorities  drive  nations 
into  wars. 

We  Americans  need  the  international  mind  as 
much  as  any  people  ever  needed  it.  We  shall 
never  be  able  to  do  justice  to  our  better  selves 
or  to  take  our  true  part  in  the  modern  world 
until  we  acquire  it.  We  must  learn  to  sup- 
press rather  than  to  exalt  those  who  en- 
deavor, whether  through  ignorance,  selfishness, 
or  malice,  to  stir  up  among  us  antagonism  to 
other  nations  and  to  other  peoples.  If  we  are 
to  take  the  place  which  many  of  us  have 
fondly  hoped  America  would  take,  at  the  very 
forefront  of  the  movement  for  the  establish- 
ment of  a  world  peace  based  upon  even- 
handed  justice,  we  must  first  learn  to  rule  our 
tongues  and  to  turn  deaf  ears  to  those  who, 
from  time  to  time,  endeavor  to  lead  us  away 
from  the  path  of  international  rectitude  and  in- 


io8         THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

ternational  honor  with  false  cries  of  a  pseudo- 
patriotism. 

Let  me  offer,  from  the  recent  Senate  debate 
on  the  treaties  of  general  arbitration,  an  ex- 
ample or  two  of  the  notions  that  must  be  re- 
moved from  the  minds  of  important  men  before 
we  can  make  much  progress  with  our  cause  and 
before  we  can  gain  the  international  mind. 

On  March  5  last,  Senator  Heyburn  of  Idaho 
told  the  Senate  this:  "There  never  has  been  a 
time  in  the  history  of  the  world  when  any  prog- 
ress was  made  through  peaceful  agreements.  I 
repeat  it,  there  has  been  no  time  in  the  history 
of  the  world  when  progress  toward  civilization 
or  a  higher  condition  of  mankind  was  made  by 
a  contract  or  agreement.  Every  advance  step 
toward  what  we  term  civilization  to-day  has 
been  the  result  of  war.  A  rule  that  has  been 
tried  out  through  so  great  a  period  of  time  is 
entitled  to  some  respect.  It  ought  not  to  be 
brushed  aside  by  the  novice  in  political  or  public 
affairs.  .  .  .  We  grow  philanthropic,  we  grow 
sentimental — I  had  almost  said  maudlin — over 
the  brotherhood  of  man.  No  nation  ever  existed 
fifteen  minutes  based  upon  the  brotherhood  of 
man;  no  community  ever  did." 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND          109 

These  are  doughty  assertions.  By  the  terms 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  the 
eminent  Senator  who  spoke  them  cannot  be 
questioned  for  them  in  any  other  place.  Where, 
however,  a  question  would  be  unconstitutional, 
a  gesture  of  wonder  and  perhaps  one  even  bor- 
dering on  inquiry  may  be  permissible!  Do  these 
strongly  expressed  opinions  really  represent 
with  accuracy  and  truth  the  teachings  of  his- 
tory? One  must  wonder  just  a  little  whether 
the  Senator  from  Idaho  had  recently  had  time 
to  refresh  his  knowledge  of  the  history  of  civil- 
ization and  of  European  diplomacy.  Obviously 
the  possession  of  what  I  have  called  an  inter- 
national mind  is  quite  incompatible  with  opin- 
ions such  as  these. 

Two  days  later,  while  participating  in  the 
same  debate,  Senator  Hitchcock  of  Nebraska 
expressed  somewhat  peremptorily  the  convic- 
tion that  the  forces  behind  the  pending  treaty 
of  arbitration  with  Great  Britain  did  not  really 
find  their  chief  interest  in  arbitration  at  all,  but 
rather  in  bringing  about  an  alliance  between 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States.  The 
learned  Senator  did  not  stop  to  indicate  how 
an  identical  treaty  with  France  and  a  proposed 


no         THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

treaty  of  similar  form  with  Germany  could  be 
reconciled  with  this  notion  of  an  alliance.  He 
was,  nevertheless,  very  determined  in  regard  to 
the  matter,  and  concluded  his  speech  with  the 
declaration  that  the  purpose  of  the  pending 
treaties  was  "to  make  a  false  union,  a  real  alli- 
ance between  the  United  States  and  Great 
Britain."  If  Senator  Hitchcock  occupied  a  less 
exalted  position  than  that  of  a  Senator  of  the 
United  States,  a  private  citizen  might  perhaps 
be  permitted  to  exclaim,  "In  the  name  of  the 
Prophet,  Bosh!" 

The  notion  that  a  treaty,  by  the  terms  of 
which  two  nations  engage  to  submit  any  dif- 
ferences which  may  arise  between  them  to  ju- 
dicial determination,  is  in  some  way  equivalent 
to  a  political  alliance,  is  one  of  the  most  curious 
that  now  finds  lodgment  either  in  the  senatorial 
or  in  the  public  mind.  Some  time  ago  in  speak- 
ing of  this  phase  of  the  matter  I  offered  the  sug- 
gestion that  anyone  who  could  mistake  an  arbi- 
tration treaty  for  an  alliance  might  be  expected 
to  confuse  a  lawsuit  with  a  marriage.  For  this 
I  was  suitably  rebuked  by  having  it  pointed  out 
to  me  that  I  did  not  understand  the  point  of 
view  of  those  who  held  this  opinion.  I  was 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND          in 

forced  to  accept  the  rebuke  in  humble  silence, 
for  I  knew  that  it  was  true;  I  certainly  do  not 
understand  the  point  of  view  of  those  who  con- 
found an  arbitration  treaty  with  a  political  alli- 
ance. If  anybody  does  understand  that  point 
of  view  I  hope  that  at  an  appropriate  time  he 
will  make  it  clear  to  the  rest  of  us. 

There  is  a  curious  and  interesting  interdepen- 
dence between  reasonableness  and  sanity  in  the 
conduct  of  domestic  politics  on  the  one  hand, 
and  kindly  feeling  and  generous  sympathy  in 
our  attitude  toward  foreign  relations  on  the 
other.  A  nation  that  is  either  intellectually, 
morally,  or  politically  turbulent,  is  not  in  any 
position  to  assume  leadership  in  the  develop- 
ment of  international  affairs  on  a  peace-loving 
and  orderly  basis.  The  political  braggart  at 
home  is  the  political  bully  abroad.  Unfortu- 
nately, our  contemporary  American  public  life 
offers  illustrations  in  abundance  of  the  un- 
happy effects  of  constantly  carrying  on  politi- 
cal discussion,  both  on  the  platform  and  in  the 
press,  with  the  manners  of  the  prize  ring  and 
the  language  of  the  lunatic  asylum.  A  large 
part  of  the  American  public  has  become  so 
accustomed  to  highly  seasoned  political  food 


H2          THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

that  it  is  no  longer  satisfied  with  a  merely  nu- 
tritious political  diet.  We  Americans  must  be 
content  to  wait  until  the  present  unhappy  tide 
of  turbulence  and  bad  manners  has  ebbed  be- 
fore we  can  venture  to  lay  claim  once  more  to 
a  place  of  leadership  in  the  development  of  con- 
structive international  policies.  Reform  of  in- 
ternational procedure,  like  charity,  begins  at 
home. 

Most  of  all,  we  must  do  our  best  to  lift  po- 
litical discussion,  both  national  and  interna- 
tional, up  out  of  the  mire  of  personality  and 
unseemly  controversies  between  individuals  and 
private  interests  on  to  the  high  ground  of  prin- 
ciple. It  is  not  fashionable  just  now  in  some 
influential  quarters  to  have  any  fixed  principles. 
There  are  those  who  think  it  becoming  to  court 
the  favor  of  the  populace  by  inquring  of  them, 
as  did  the  frightened  peasants  of  Louis  XI, 
"Sire,  what  are  our  opinions?"  There  are 
others  who  appear  to  emulate  the  example  of 
Artemus  Ward  who,  when  asked  what  were  his 
principles,  replied:  "I  have  no  principles;  I  am 
in  the  show  business." 

It;is  in  the  highest  degree  important  that 
upon  all  this  sort  of  thing  we  should  turn  our 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND          113 

backs.  Political  progress,  whether  national  or 
international,  must  depend  upon  trust  in  the 
better  instincts  of  the  people,  and  cannot  rest 
upon  their  appetites  and  their  passions,  their 
envies  and  their  animosities.  A  vast  majority 
of  the  people  of  the  United  States  are  God- 
fearing, law-abiding,  devoted  to  liberty  and 
order,  and  sincerely  desirous  of  promoting  the 
common  welfare.  Unhappily,  political  exploiters 
and  promoters  frequently  keep  up  such  a  din 
and  so  skilfully  organize  the  adventurous  ele- 
ments of  the  population  that  real  public  opinion, 
our  true  national  character,  and  the  genuine 
public  will  are  often  quite  in  the  background. 
From  time  to  time  we  are  ruled  and  represented 
by  the  noisy  and  well-organized  majorities  of 
minorities,  and  whenever  this  happens  we  slide 
backward  in  political  dignity  and  political  wis- 
dom. When  the  people  as  a  whole  grasp  these 
facts,  as  they  surely  will,  they  will  assert  them- 
selves with  no  uncertain  voice,  and  our  nation 
will  once  more  put  its  feet  in  the  path  of  per- 
manent progress.  The  moment  that  sober  rea- 
son resumes  its  rule,  our  cause  will  be  secure. 
Human  progress  cannot  be  held  long  in  check 
by  selfish  endeavor,  and  both  at  home  and 


H4          THE  INTERNATIONAL  MIND 

abroad  we  may  look  forward  with  confidence 
and  abundant  hope  to  the  coming  of  the  day 
when  justice  shall  rule,  and  when  a  lasting 
peace,  based  upon  justice,  shall  set  free  all 
man's  resources  for  man's  uplifting. 


INDEX 


INDEX 


Adams,  C.  F.,  on  the  Trent  Affair, 
105-7 

Aerial  navigation  in  war,  30 

American  public  opinion,  Influence  of, 
abroad,  10-11 

Americans  and  political  organization 
of  the  world,  43-44;  should  lead  in 
establishing  the  world's  peace,  65- 
66;  chief  offenders  in  unpleasant 
international  discussions,  105;  need 
the  international  mind,  107 

Arbitration  and  Peace  Congress, 
National,  at  New  York,  3, 10, 16 

Arbitration,  international,  The  op- 
ponents of,  50-54 

Arbitration,  Treaties  of,  between 
United  States  and  Great  Britain, 
01-94 

Arbitration  treaty  confounded  with 
political  alliance,  109-11 

ARE  WE  OUR  BROTHERS'  KEEPERS? 
47-66 

Armaments,  Expenditure  for  naval, 
22;  obstacle  to  limitation  of,  30-33; 
taxes  wasted  on,  37-38,  53;  United 
States  should  stop  increase  of,  62- 
63;  and  trade,  71-72;  the  problem 
of  inflated,  89,  103 

Annies  and  navies,  Restricting  the 
growth  of,  12 

Avebury,  Lord,  on  seizure  of  private 
property  at  sea,  90 

Battle-ship  used  as  a  target,  89 
Bethmann-Hollweg,   Chancellor  von, 

on  causes  of  wars,  107 
Bright,  John,  on  the  Trent  Affair,  106 
British   Government,   The,   and   the 
restriction  of  armaments,  12;    de- 
voted to  peace,  17-18 


Brotherhood  of  man,  108 
Brotherhood  of  the  world,  61 
BROTHERS'  KEEPERS,  ARI  WE  OUR? 

47-66 

Billow,  Prince  von,  and  Lord  Wear- 
dale,  at  Berlin,  35-36 

Captures,  Alleged  illegal,  in  time  of 
war,  87 

Carnegie  Endowment  for  Interna- 
tional Peace,  the,  Aims  and  purposes 
of,  72-73;  organization  of,  73-74; 
Division  of  International  Law,  74- 
77;  Division  of  Economics  and 
History,  78-81;  Division  of  Inter- 
course and  Education,  81-82;  tasks 
set  by,  83 

Carrying  trade,  German  competition 
in  the,  25-26 

Civilization,  Development  of,  71;  a 
higher  and  nobler,  80-81;  the  na- 
tions and,  102,  104;  Senator  Hey- 
burn  on,  108 

Clark,  John  Bates,  head  of  Division 
of  Economics  and  History,  78 

Cleveland,  Grover,  approved  Olney- 
Pauncefote  treaty,  ga 

Commerce  not  developed  by  navies, 
71,  oo;  destruction  of,  in  time  of 
war,  00-91 

Conferees,  American  international,  16- 
17 

Congress,  Appropriation  by,  for  Bureau 
for  Promotion  of  International  Ar- 
bitration, 47 

Court  of  arbitral  justice,  A,  47 

Courts,  Right  to  sue  and  defend  in  the, 
the  alternative  of  force,  57 

Credit,  A  nation's,  37-38 

Criticism  of  other  nations,  63-64 

117 


n8 


INDEX 


Declaration  of  London,  The,  85 

Democracy,  Spread  of,  4 

Differences,  Judicial  settlement  of,  8- 
9;  under  principles  of  international 
law,  75 

Diplomacy,  American,  Two  maxims 
of,  103 

Disarmament,  The  question  of,  11-12, 
62 

Domestic  politics  and  foreign  rela- 
tions, in 

Dreamers  and  theorists,  Who  are  the, 
48-50 

Economic  and  social  questions,  Neglect 
of,  37-38 

Economics  and  History,  Division  of, 
of  the  Carnegie  Endowment,  78- 
81;  aims  of,  78;  subjects  of  study, 
79-80;  results  looked  for,  80-81 

Economist,  The  London,  on  commerce 
destruction,  91 

Economists,  Co-operation  of,  under 
the  Carnegie  Endowment,  78-79 

EDUCATION  OF  THE  WORU>  FOR  PEACE, 
69-94 

England,  jealous  of  Germany's  world 
importance,  24;  attitude  of,  to- 
wards Germany,  preposterous,  26- 
29;  reasons  for  a  big  navy  in,  29- 
32;  restoration  of  friendship  of, 
with  Germany,  33-34 

English  people,  Signs  of  emotional  in- 
sanity in  the,  22-24 

Enmity,  International,  imaginary,  34 

Executive  authority,  Public  opinion 
the  true  international,  40-42 

Faculty  of  Peace,  A  veritable,  83 
Fear,  Man's  progress  from,  to  faith,  64 
Federation  of  the  world's  legislatures, 

A  coming,  39-40 
Fighting  an  animal  appetite,  9 
Financial  neutrality,  Importance  of, 

14-16;  James  Speyer  on,  15-16 
Force,  Use  of,  6,  9;  and  right,  8,  6g; 
substitution  of  rule  of  justice  for 
rule  of,  22;  nations  not  under  rule 
of,  49-50;  United  States  Supreme 
Court  on  the  alternative  of,  57 


France,  a  peaceful  nation,  must  arm, 
53;  treaty  of  arbitration  with,  re- 
jected, 99-100 

French  spirit,  The,  5 

German  idealism,  5 

German  navy,  Excitement  in  England 
over  the,  26-29 

Germany  gaining  in  importance  in  the 
world,  24;  foreign  commerce  of,  25- 
26;  navy  of,  26-27;  belief  in  war- 
like purpose  of,  against  England, 
preposterous,  27-29;  friendship  of, 
with  England  should  be  restored, 
33-34;  friendly  incident  at  Berlin, 
35-36;  a  peaceful  nation,  must  arm, 
53;  war  scare  of  1911  in,  97-99; 
honor  due  Emperor  and  statesmen 
of,  99;  suspicion  against,  easily 
aroused,  105 

Gladstone,  W.  E.,  a  dominant  power, 
23;  had  the  international  mind,  101 

Government,  A  federal  form  of,  proved 
practicable,  64-65 

Government,  The  foundation  of  or- 
derly, 57 

Governments  dominated  by  public 
opinion,  36-37 

Graft  in  expenditures  for  war  prepa- 
rations, 55-56,  70 

Great  Britain,  Objection  of,  to  Inter- 
national Court  of  Prize,  85;  treaty 
of  arbitration  with,  91-93;  war 
scare  of  1911  in,  97-99;  rejection  of 
arbitration  treaty  with,  by  United 
States  Senate,  99-100;  Senator 
Hitchcock's  fear  of  an  alliance  with, 
109-10 

Gullibility  of  mankind,  54 

Hague,  The,  A  permanent  internation- 
al judiciary  at,  84 

Hague  Conference,  Second  Inter- 
national, 3;  two  things  asked  from 
the,  12-14;  should  assemble  at 
stated  intervals,  13,  14;  results  of 
the,  21-22,  84;  on  the  maintenance 
of  peace,  77;  failure  of  International 
Court  of  Arbitral  Justice  at,  87-89 

Hague  Conference,  The  third,  88 


INDEX 


119 


Hague  Conventions  ignored  by  Italy 
and  Turkey,  100-1 

Hague  Court,  Change  of  the,  to  a 
truly  judicial  tribunal,  12-14,  21; 
enforcing  findings  of,  13;  to  be  es- 
tablished, 38 

Hague  Protocol,  The,  15 

Hay,  John,  had  the  international 
mind,  102;  on  American  diplomacy, 
103 

Heyburn,  Senator,  of  Idaho,  on  peace- 
ful agreements,  108;  has  not  an  in- 
ternational mind,  109 

Hirst,  Mr.,  on  commerce  destruction, 

°t 

History,  A  new  conception  of,  80-81 
Hitchcock,    Senator,    of    Nebraska, 

feared  an  alliance  with  Great  Britain, 

109-10 

Ill-feeling  and  suspicion  easily  aroused, 
105 

Improvement,  Social  and  economic, 
vs.  armaments,  37 

Intercourse  and  Education,  Division 
of,  of  Carnegie  Endowment,  81-82 

International  court,  A  permanent, 
wanted,  12, 14,  27;  to  be  established 
38;  executive  authority  for,  40-42 

International  Court  of  Arbitral  Jus- 
tice, 84;  purpose  of,  87;  progress 
toward  establishment  of,  88-89 

International  Court  of  Arbitration, 
Submission  of  Newfoundland  fish- 
eries question  to  the,  48,  83-84 

International  era,  An,  opening,  5 

International  justice,  American  pub- 
lic opinion  and,  n;  perfecting  the 
fundamental  conception  of,  75 

International  law,  A  court  for  de- 
claring and  establishing,  wanted,  12; 
the  true  executive  of,  40-42;  Divi- 
sion of,  of  the  Carnegie  Endow- 
ment, 74-77,  81;  progressive  de- 
velopment of  rules  of,  74-75; 
establishment  of  fundamental  prin- 
cipes  of,  75-76 

INTERNATIONAL  MIND,  THE,  97-114; 
examples  of  the,  101;  what  it  is, 
102;  how  gained,  103-5;  Ameri- 
cans need,  107 


International  parliament,  The  germ 
of  an,  14 

International  Prize  Court  to  be  a  court 
of  arbitral  justice,  47;  created  by 
second  Hague  Conference,  84; 
objections  to  the,  85-87;  presup- 
poses war,  87,  89 

International  relations,  5;  in  time  of 
war,  14-16;  aims  of  the  Carnegie 
Endowment  toward,  73,  79,  82-83 

INTERNATIONALISM,  THE  PROGRESS  OF 
REAL,  3-18 

Interparliamentary  Union  at  Berlin, 
35;  permanent  organization  of,  and 
results,  38-42;  delegations  at  the, 
39;  appropriation  by  Congress  for 
Bureau  of,  47 

Island,  Change  in  significance  of  word, 
30 

Italy  and  Turkey,  War  between,  ico-i 

Joubert  on  Force  and  Right,  8 

Judicial  decisions,  Majority  of,  equi- 
table, 8-9 

Judicial  determination  of  questions  of 
national  honor  or  interests,  47; 
progress  of  movement  for,  57,  62, 
74,  77,  82,  83 

Justice,  Dominance  of,  4-5;  substi- 
tution of  rule  of,  for  rule  of  force,  22, 
30;  spirit  of,  to  be  cultivated,  43- 
44;  the  real  ground  of  security  for 
men  and  nations,  48;  the  path  of, 
the  path  of  honor,  66;  opposition  to 
peace  through,  72;  shall  rule,  114 

Justice,  International,  48;  part  of  a 
complete  philosophy  of  life,  49;  in- 
difference and  opposition  to,  50-54; 
or  armed  force,  58-59;  inculcation 
of  belief  in,  75,  82 

Knox,  P.  C.,  Identic  circular  note  of, 
47 

Lake  Mohonk  Conference,  1007,  3; 
accomplishment  of  the,  to;  of  1009, 
21;  aim  of  the,  42;  of  1910,  47;  of 
1911,  68,  89,  97;  of  1912,  97,  99 

Law,  see  International  law 

Legislative  inquiry  into  military  and 
naval  appropriations  needed,  55-56 


I2O 


INDEX 


London  Chamber  of  Commerce,  on 
seizure  of  private  property  at  sea, 
90 

Man,  Mark  of  a  real,  98-99 

Mason  and  Slidell,  106 

Might  and  right,  4,  8,  69 

Militarism,  Evil  spirit  of,  among  the 
English,  23;  less  profitable  than 
peace,  71;  expenditures  for,  79 

Minorities,  Fanatical,  drive  nations 
into  wars,  107;  rule  of  majority  of, 
«3 

Moral  education  of  the  world,  5-6; 
our  task,  49 

Morality  of  the  future,  The,  6;  prin- 
ciples of,  in  the  body  corporate,  104 

Nation,  Mind  and  conscience  of  a,  5; 
a  turbulent,  HI 

National  character,  What  constitutes, 
104;  kept  in  the  background,  113 

National  duty,  Our,  104-5,  107,  112- 
14 

National  existence  not  dependent  upon 
military  and  naval  force,  29-30 

National  honor,  False  arguments  for 
defense  of,  by  force,  58-59 

Nationalities,  A  place  in  the  world  for 
many,  104 

Nations,  Growth  of,  4,  6-7;  as  liti- 
gants, 9;  most  powerful,  at  peace, 
17;  influence  of  public  opinion  on, 
41-42;  not  under  rule  of  brute  force, 
49-50;  at  peace  must  prepare  for 
war,  53-54;  fundamental  principle 
of  rights  of,  57-58;  criticism  of 
other,  63-64;  faith  in  vs.  fear  of 
other,  64;  should  submit  differences 
to  judicial  determination,  65;  to  be 
instructed  in  their  juristic  relations 
toward  each  other,  74-75,  76,  82; 
co-operation  of,  for  civilization,  71; 
in  a  judicial  system,  73;  mainten- 
ance of  peace  the  supreme  duty  of, 
77;  moved  by  example  and  prece- 
dent, 94;  friendly  and  co-operating 
equals,  102 

Naval  standard,  The  two-power,  of 
England,  31-33 


Neutrality,  see  Financial  neutrality 
Newfoundland  fisheries  question  sub- 
mitted to  the  Hague  arbitral  tri- 
bunal, 48;   settlement  of,  83-84 
Nobel  Prize,  Candidates  for  the,  99 

Olney-Pauncefote  treaty,  The,  91-92 

Patriotism,  Economics  and,  55-56 

Peace,  Activity  for  the  world's,  36, 
66,  69-70;  maintenance  of,  the  su- 
preme duty  of  nations,  77;  epoch- 
making  work  for,  98;  obtaining, 
through  justice,  101;  America 
should  lead  movement  for,  107 

Peace,  The  law  of,  and  the  law  of  na- 
tions, 76-77 

Peace  and  justice,  Political  organiza- 
tion for,  38;  rule  of,  shall  come,  114 

Police,  An  international,  10,  13 

Political  discussion,  Debasement  of, 
111-112;  elevation  of,  needed,  112- 
14 

Political  economy,  Broadening  the 
study  and  teaching  of,  78-80 

Political  organization  of  the  world,  33, 
38-42;  evolutionary,  43;  responsi- 
bility of  Americans  toward  the,  43- 
44 

Political  progress,  113-14 

Principles,  Fixed,  not  fashionable,  112 

Private  property  at  sea  should  be  free 
from  capture,  00-91 

PROGRESS  or  REAL  INTERNATIONAL- 
ISM, 3-18 

PUBLIC  OPINION,  THE  WORLD'S  ARMA- 
MENTS AND,  21-44 

Public  opinion,  Education  of  the 
world's,  36-37,  69;  the  true  inter- 
national executive  authority,  40- 
42,  65;  the  power  of,  41-42,  69-70; 
influence  of  the  United  States  on 
the  world's,  10-11,  64-66;  in  eco- 
nomics and  history,  78,  81;  excit- 
ability of,  105-6 

Relations  and  disputes,  Individual 
and  international,  5 

Rhodes,  Cecil,  and  financial  neutral- 
ity, 15 


INDEX 


121 


Right,  Might  and,  4,  69;  Joubert  on 

Force  and,  8 
Rights  and  duties  implied  in  principles 

and  rules  of  international  law  to  be 

taught,  75;   maintenance  of,  76-77; 

a  better  understanding  of,  82 
Root,  Elihu,  on  public  opinion  as  the 

true  international  executive,  40-41; 

has  the  international  mind,  102 

Scott,  James  Brown,  head  of  Division 
of  International  Law,  74;  consulta- 
tive board  associated  with,  75-76 

Self-redress  and  judicial  settlement,  77 

Senators  of  United  States,  Some,  ig- 
norant of  international  business,  100 

Spectator,  The  London,  on  rejection  of 
the  Olney-Pauncefote  treaty  by  the 
United  States  Senate,  92 

Speyer,  James,  on  financial  neutrality, 
15-16 

Statesmanship,  Examples  of  genuine, 
98-99 

Straus,  O.  S.,  and  financial  neutrality, 
16 

Taft,  President,  on  questions  involv- 
ing national  honor  and  interests,  47; 
on  an  arbitration  treaty  with  Great 
Britain,  93 

Tariffs,  Effects  of,  79 

Taxes  wasted  on  armaments,  37-38 

Temple,  Archbishop,  on  principles,  18 

Theorists  and  dreamers,  Who  are  the, 
48-50 

Trent  Affair,  Charles  Francis  Adams 
on  the,  105-7 

Turkey  and  Italy,  War  between,  loo-i 


United  States,  Contribution  of,  to- 
ward judicial  settlement  of  inter- 
national differences,  61-63;  in- 
fluence of,  on  world  opinion,  64-65; 
should  lead  in  establishing  the 
world's  peace,  65-66 

United  States  Senate  approved  the 
International  Court  of  Prize,  87; 
refused  to  ratify  Olney-Pauncefote 
treaty,  91-93 

United  States  Supreme  Court,  The, 
13,  14;  on  the  right  to  sue  and  de- 
fend in  the  courts,  57;  objection  of, 
to  International  Court  of  Prize,  85- 
87 

Virtues,  The  sterner,  exercised  by  war 
and  conflict,  59-60 

Visits,  International,  between  Ger- 
many and  England,  28-29 

War,  international,  Abolition  of,  74 
War,  Legal  and  economic  incidents  of, 
to  be  studied,  73;  the  rules  of,  and 
the  law  of  nations,  76-77;  economic 
causes  and  effects  of,  79-80,  82; 
fateful  work  for,  97-98;  boisterous 
talk  of,  100 

Ward,  Artemus,  on  principles,  112 
Wars  part  of  the  divine  order,  70 
Weardale,  Lord,  and  members  of  Par- 
liament meet  von  Billow  at  Berlin, 
35-36 

William  II,  German  Emperor,  favors 
world  peace,  17-18;  honor  due  to, 

09 

WORLD'S  ARMAMENTS,  THE,  AND  PUB- 
LIC OPINION,  21-44 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY,  LOS  ANGELES 

COLLEGE  LIBRARY 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


Book  Slip-25m-9,'59(A4772s4)4280 


UCLA-College  Library 

JX  1953  B97 


L  005  667  311  4 


College 
Library 


JX 
1953 

397 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A    001  043  132     8 


